MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988809576 · doi:10.1121/1.5136915

On geoacoustic inversions, sediment acoustics, and deep ocean ambient noise

2019· article· en· W2988809576 on OpenAlexaff
David R. Barclay

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbient noise levelGeologyTrenchOceanographyDeep seaBeach morphodynamicsWaves and shallow waterNoise (video)SeabedTrough (economics)SedimentSediment transportAcousticsSeismologySound (geography)Geomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the period of 2005–2011, three topics in acoustical oceanography were actively investigated in the Buckingham Lab which combined field, lab, and theoretical work. Geoacoustic inversions in the low frequency (<500 Hz) band were carried out using the noise generated by a light aircraft off the coast of La Jolla, California, and during the MAKAI experiment in Kauai, Hawaii. The inversion relied on a comparison of data to an analytical model of a moving airborne source over a two-layer shallow water waveguide. In an effort to investigate the link between grain roughness and porosity to support the development of a theory of acoustic propagation in sediments, a statistical model for the two-dimensional shape of sand grains was developed from the digitized outlines of grains from a dozen locations, including deserts, beaches, and seabeds. Lastly, a family of autonomous free-falling ambient noise profilers known as Deep Sound, were designed, manufactured, and deployed, returning measurements of ambient noise from below the critical (or reciprocal) depth in the deep ocean. Field experiments were carried out in the San Diego trough, the Philippine Sea, the Tonga Trench, and the Sirena Deep and Challenger Deep in the Mariana Trench.

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)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207