MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883006360 · doi:10.1029/2017jb015132

Infrasound Signal Detection and Back Azimuth Estimation Using Ground‐Coupled Airwaves on a Seismo‐Acoustic Sensor Pair

2018· article· en· W2883006360 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kathleen McKee, David Fee, M. M. Haney, Robin S. Matoza, J. J. Lyons

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAzimuthSeismometerInfrasoundGeologyAcousticsSeismologySIGNAL (programming language)MicrophoneMicroseismSeismogramNoise (video)Remote sensingGeodesyComputer sciencePhysicsOpticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a new infrasonic signal detection and back azimuth determination technique that requires just one microphone and one three‐component seismometer. Ground‐coupled airwaves (GCAs) occur when an incident atmospheric acoustic wave impinges on the ground surface and is partially transmitted as a seismic wave. GCAs are commonly detected hundreds of kilometers away on seismic networks and are observed to have retrograde particle motion. Horizontally propagating acoustic waves and GCAs have previously been observed on collocated infrasound and seismic sensor pairs as coherent with a 90° phase difference. If the sensors are spatially separated, an additional propagation‐induced phase shift is present. The additional phase shift depends on the direction from which the acoustic wave arrives, as each back azimuth has a different apparent distance between the sensors. We use the additional phase shift, the coherence, and the characteristic particle motion on the three‐component seismometer to determine GCA arrivals and their unique back azimuth. We test this technique with synthetic seismo‐acoustic data generated by a coupled Earth‐atmosphere 3‐D finite difference code, as well as three seismo‐acoustic data sets from Mount St. Helens, Mount Cleveland, and Mount Pagan volcanoes. Results from our technique compare favorably with traditional infrasound array processing and provide robust GCA detection and back azimuth determination. Assuming adequate station spacing and sampling, our technique provides a new and robust method to detect infrasonic signals and determine their back azimuth, and may be of practical benefit where resources are limited and large sensor networks or arrays are not feasible.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 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

Citations49
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid EarthSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207