Magnetic surveying with an unmanned ground vehicle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the recent proliferation of unmanned aerial vehicles for geophysical surveying, a novel opportunity exists to develop unmanned ground vehicles in parallel. This contribution features a study to integrate the Husky A200 robotic development platform with a GSMP 35U magnetometer that has recently been developed for the unmanned aerial vehicle market. Methods to identify and reduce the impact of magnetically noisy components on the unmanned ground vehicle platforms are discussed. The noise generated by the platform in laboratory and gentle field conditions, estimated using the fourth difference method for a magnetometer–vehicle separation distance of 121 cm and rotation of the chassis wheels at full speed (1 m/s), is ±1.97 nT. The integrated unmanned ground vehicle was used to conduct two robotic magnetic surveys to map cultural targets and natural variations of the magnetic field. In realistic field conditions, at a full speed of 1 m/s, the unmanned ground vehicle measured total magnetic intensity over a range of 1730 nT at 0.1 m spatial resolution with a productivity of 2651 line metres per hour.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".