MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046104424 · doi:10.3934/dcds.2020285

Identifying varying magnetic anomalies using geomagnetic monitoring

2020· article· en· W3046104424 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarth's magnetic fieldSecular variationMagnetic anomalyVariation (astronomy)GeophysicsAnomaly (physics)GeologyGeomagnetic secular variationInverse problemMagnetic fieldGeodesyStatistical physicsPhysicsMathematicsGeomagnetic stormMathematical analysisCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are concerned with the inverse problem of identifying magnetic anomalies with varying parameters beneath the Earth using geomagnetic monitoring. Observations of the change in Earth's magnetic field–the secular variation–provide information about the anomalies as well as their variations. In this paper, we rigorously establish the unique recovery results for this magnetic anomaly detection problem. We show that one can uniquely recover the locations, the variation parameters including the growth or decaying rates as well as their material parameters of the anomalies. This paper extends the existing results in [9] by two of the authors to the more practical and challenging scenario with varying anomalies.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.242
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