MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2756829961 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1709.07469

Massively parallel stochastic solution of the geophysical gravity problem

2017· preprint· en· W2756829961 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fabrizio Donzelli, Alexander Bihlo, Mauricio Kischinhevsky, Colin G. Farquharson

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersResearch and Development Corporation of Newfoundland and LabradorNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsParallelizable manifoldBenchmark (surveying)Context (archaeology)Computer scienceMassively parallelPoisson distributionMathematical optimizationEmbarrassingly parallelGravitationApplied mathematicsDomain (mathematical analysis)AccelerationComputational scienceAlgorithmMathematicsParallel computingGeologyPhysicsMathematical analysisClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we report the advantages of using a stochastic algorithm in the context of mineral exploration based on gravity measurements. This approach has the advantage over deterministic methods in that it allows one to find the solution of the Poisson equation in specified, isolated points without the need of meshing the computational domain and solving the Poisson equation over the entire domain. Moreover, the stochastic approach is embarrassingly parallelizable and therefore suitable for an implementation on multi-core compute clusters with or without GPUs. Benchmark tests are carried out that show that the stochastic approach can yield accurate results for both the gravitational potential and the gravitational acceleration and could hence provide an alternative to existing deterministic methods used in mineral exploration.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.106 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207