MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982200929 · doi:10.4095/214575

The role of GIS and expert knowledge in 3-D modelling, Oak Ridges Moraine, southern Ontario

2006· report· en· W2982200929 on OpenAlexaffabout
C Logan, H A J Russell, D R Sharpe, Frank Kenny

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoreholeGeologyExpert systemContext (archaeology)Thematic mapRaster graphicsData miningCartographyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeographyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A basin analysis approach is used to help understand a complex aquifer system in the Oak Ridges Moraine and Greater Toronto areas, southern Ontario, Canada. The aquifer complex consists of a sequence of discontinuous strata that have a prominent regional unconformity. To help visualize this architecture, a stratigraphic database has been developed and used to construct a 3-D stratigraphic model, through selective integration of disparate data. To accurately interpret borehole logs, geological context was supplied by using expert knowledge constrained with a conceptual stratigraphic framework. Utilizing a digital stratigraphic training framework derived from manually coded, high-quality data, an expert system automatically interpreted and coded a large number of low-quality water well records. The expert system was designed to emulate the manual borehole interpretation process by applying knowledge-based geological rules, within the constraints of the digital training framework. Issues of poorly constrained interpolation due to sparse data are addressed by the integration of additional spatial rules defined by thematic map coverages within the expert system. As quantitative hydrogeological modelling moves to more regional scales, geological knowledge input becomes increasingly more valuable. The availability of seamless geological mapping improves 3-D modelling and helps to limit the effect of deficiencies in data coverage and data quality, often encountered in regional hydrogeological studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207