MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045188720 · doi:10.1007/1345_2020_115

Progress in GTEWS Ground Displacement Measurements and Tsunami Warning

2020· book-chapter· en· W3045188720 on OpenAlexafffund
Marcelo C. Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Association of Geodesy symposia · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGNSS applicationsWarning systemGeodetic datumGlobal Positioning SystemEarly warning systemSatellite systemComputer scienceTelecommunicationsRemote sensingSystems engineeringReal-time computingGeographyGeodesyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Since its early days, GNSS has been employed for the monitoring of sudden ground movements, such as earthquakes. Its use as a tool to enhance tsunami detection was boosted after analysis of data following the December 2004 Great Ocean Indian Tsunami. The contribution of GNSS towards tsunami warning systems is possible due to several factors, such as advances in the measurement of crustal displacement, developments in GNSS methodology, the growing availability of real-time data streams and advances in processing power and communication means. The paper focuses on the progress of Global Navigation Satellite System Tsunami Early Warning Systems (GTEWS) identifying current implementations and future directions and challenges. The discussion leads to the conclusion that the GNSS technology already satisfies requirements of tsunami early warning systems and that the major hurdles are with other aspects, such as optimal network configuration, real-time flow of data, communication infrastructure, and national and international collaboration. The paper ends highlighting the important role that the Global Geodetic Observing System (GGOS) can play to help overcoming those hurdles.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Association of Geodesy symposiaSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207