MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981896973 · doi:10.4095/211405

Rationalized detailed gravity data, southern Saskatchewan

2000· report· en· W2981896973 on OpenAlexaffabout
W Miles, W R Roest, Lisa C. Kelley, M Gent

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This open file is a compilation of more than 150 separate detailed gravity surveys, levelled to a common datum. The datum is represented by the regional gravity data holdings of the National Gravity Anomaly Data Base maintained by the Geodetic Survey Division of Geomatics Canada. The national data are tied to the International Gravity Standardization Network 1971 (IGSN71) and are included in this compilation. The levelled data are presented on a CD-ROM as a PC binary file of 230,312 records. Each record contains 31 fields. The binary data may be manipulated using the program 'RET_256.COM'. This program is included on the CD and will run on any 386 or higher PC. 'RET_256' allows the user to extract subsets of the data based on area or survey. Areas are defined by latitude and longitude ranges and surveys are defined by a range of project numbers. The user may also recalculate Bouguer gravity anomalies using user-specified Bouguer densities (rock, water and ice) in order to better represent local crustal densities. In addition, the anomalies may be recalculated using the three most common geoid models: WGS84, GRS67 or Potsdam 1930.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.013

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis→French-language works237,207→