MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799716020 · doi:10.1190/geo2017-0140.1

Terracing of potential fields by clustering methods

2018· article· en· W2799716020 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Giovanni Florio, Davide Lo Re

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceData miningField (mathematics)Simple (philosophy)Euclidean distanceSet (abstract data type)Distribution (mathematics)AlgorithmCluster (spacecraft)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We have applied clustering techniques to the terracing of potential field data. We found out how k-means clustering or a simple reclassification of the field values based on the minimum Euclidean distance from a set of cluster centers can produce a nicely terraced potential field map, with the degree of simplification of the original map controlled by the number of clusters. We developed a method to automatically define the number and the center value of these clusters. The gravity or magnetic maps terraced by clustering techniques are transformed and present no smooth transitions, and each terrace has a constant field value. Such a terraced map is thus suitable for computing an apparent physical property distribution. To obtain even better results, it is possible to combine clustering techniques with edge-preserving filters. We tested our method on simple and complex synthetic fields and finally applied it to the real gravity data of a mining region in Canada, finding good correspondence between the resulting apparent density distribution and a simplified geologic map.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207