MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035208538 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201902602

Numerical Modelling of Ground Penetrating Radar for Potash Mine Safety

2019· article· en· W3035208538 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Okonkwo, Tokini Briggs, Raman Paranjape, Matthew van den Berghe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarRoofFinite-difference time-domain methodSoftwarePotashRadarGeologyComputer scienceEngineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary This paper presents a software tool which simulates the geological stratigraphy of a potash mine which is then used with gprMax (public domain Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) simulation software) to examine and evaluate the effectiveness of auto-picking algorithms. The system is used to simulate the GPR response from clay seams in the roof of potash mining rooms. As it is extremely onerous to obtain in-situ data that captures all possible normal and anomalous geological conditions present in the mine roof, earth models are generated which accurately represents the geology of the mine. In particular, random clays in the mine roof can negatively affect the performance of auto-picking algorithms. These earth model simulations can be used to present these random clays accurately. gprMax is an open source software that simulates Electro-Magnetic (EM) wave propagation in materials in order to support a better understanding of the use of GPR in various applications. Currently, GPR systems are in use in potash mines to assist with monitoring of the roof status of mining rooms. The goal of this paper is to validate the ability of using gprMax with effective earth models to generate realistic GPR signals that are used to test and evaluate auto-picking algorithms. The use of simulated data in comparison to the experimental (actual physical) data and generation of test bed models for an auto-picking algorithm has many benefits. Synthetic data is generated by gprMax using the Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) methodology. An effective methodology to develop and test robust auto-picking algorithms is created using simulated GPR signals because the ground truth is known from the earth models. Additionally, in this work results from both an industry standard auto-picking algorithm and a newly developed auto-picking algorithm, called Clustered Ratio Derivative (CRD), are presented for this mine roof monitoring application. Finally, in this work we take advantage of cloud computing resources in order to execute this work.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207