MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330522552 · doi:10.1071/aseg2013ab147

Effective methods to highlight and delineate anomalies from geophysical images

2013· article· en· W2330522552 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eun‐Jung Holden, Peter Kovesi, Daniel Wedge, Alan Aitken

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVisualizationLuminanceAnomaly detectionImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceInterpretation (philosophy)Field (mathematics)Computer visionData miningPattern recognition (psychology)Remote sensingGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geophysical data interpretation is largely an anomaly detection task which involves recognising and synthesising anomalous patterns within single or multiple datasets. The accuracy and efficiency of these interpretations heavily relies on the skills and practices of interpreters, thus the greatest challenge is to minimise personal biases to produce objective and consistent interpretation outcomes. We present an innovative data visualisation method which can empower interpreters to effectively delineate anomalies of varying frequency scales within aeromagentic data using a single image display. This is achieved by harnessing the power of image enhancement and visualisation techniques to assist interpretation.We adapted and extended the use of colour composite techniques to present different frequencies presented in potential field data. Aeromagnetic data from an area in Kirkland Lake, Ontario, Canada is used for our experiment. long wavelength and short wavelength anomalies are identified from the data using low pass- and high pass filters respectively. These two different frequency enhanced images and the original image are represented as separate colour channels which are then combined to generate a composite image. The luminance of the composite image is scaled to highlight high frequency signals as they hold the key for detailed structure interpretation. We use a technique called dynamic range compression, which preserves the integrity of the phase component of the signal while performing high pass filtering. The resulting display is compared to the geological map of the area to validate the effectiveness of the method. The proposed technique is widely adaptable for different types of datasets.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207