MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989375361 · doi:10.1121/1.5136909

Geoacoustic inversion the Buckingham way

2019· article· en· W2989375361 on OpenAlexaff
N. Ross Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySound propagationInversion (geology)Shearing (physics)AcousticsAmbient noise levelSedimentGeophysicsOceanographyGeotechnical engineeringSeismologySound (geography)GeomorphologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the impact of Mike’s research on geoacoustic inversion for characterization of sea bed sediments. First is his paper in 1987 that reported the use of vertical coherence of ambient ocean noise for estimating critical angles of sea bed sediment. Apart from the novel use of ambient noise as a sound source, his work opened the idea to make use of information about the ocean bottom contained in spatial phase relationships in vertical hydrophone array data. The practice was quickly adapted and widely applied as matched field inversion. However, the inversions were generally carried out using visco-elastic theory of sound propagation, an approach that is not the most appropriate for applications with porous sediment material. Mike’s next contribution addressed this issue in his series of papers starting around 1997 on the grain-shearing and viscous grain-shearing models of sound propagation in porous media. His theory provided a physical basis for the model parameters that are used to describe the interaction of sound with porous sediment media in geoacoustic inversions. Recent examples are shown that indicate how these innovations have become standard practice in geoacoustic inversions.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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