MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514688237 · doi:10.1190/segam2016-13680175.1

Induced-polarization effects in airborne electromagnetic data: Estimating chargeability from shape reversals

2016· article· en· W2514688237 on OpenAlexaff
Richard S. Smith

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduced polarizationPolarization (electrochemistry)TransmitterAmplitudeGeologyPhysicsRemote sensingGeodesyComputer scienceOpticsTelecommunicationsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Induced polarization effects have been seen since the 1970s in ground EM data and in airborne EM data since the 1990s. These effects normally manifest themselves as negative amplitudes in transient electromagnetic data. For fixed-wing towed-bird electromagnetic systems, negatives can also occur as a geometric effect, but for systems where the transmitter is effectively coincident with the receiver, Weidelt has shown that coincident-system negatives can only be explained as an induced polarization effect. These negatives are now being seen more frequently in airborne data as the systems have become more powerful and fly closer to the ground. Previous studies showed that the negatives are largest and most evident when the current induced in the ground is strong, but decays away quickly and the ground has a significant chargeability. These conditions have been satisfied in permafrost conditions, over lakes, over kimberlites, and near to disseminated mineralization. Identifying induced polarization effects where negatives do not occur is challenging: it can be done by analyzing the decay rate, or as I describe in this paper by looking at reversals in the shape of the response in combination with the decay rate. Presentation Date: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 Start Time: 1:30:00 PM Location: Lobby D/C Presentation Type: POSTER

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207