MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preliminary Study on Fusion Scheme of Multi-dimensional and Multi-scale Potential Field Data

2020· article· en· W3083878162 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaolin Ji, Wanyin Wang, Fuxiang Liu, Min Yang, Shengqing Xiong, Jie Ma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuse (electrical)Sensor fusionScale (ratio)Benchmark (surveying)Data processingComputer scienceGravitational fieldField (mathematics)FusionData miningGeophysicsRemote sensingGeodesyGeologyEngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligenceDatabaseMathematicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Gravity and magnetic surveys are widely used in geology exploration because of its advantages, such as efficient and economy, green and environment-friendly, widely coverage and strong horizontal resolution. In order to well study in the geology exploration, it is required to comprehensively combine the different scales (different scales data) and different dimensions (satellite data, aeronautical data, ground data, ocean data, well data, etc.) of gravity and magnetic data that were observed in different periods, however, the comprehensive application of the multi-dimensional and multi-scale gravity and magnetic data still stays in the initial stage. In this paper, we do research on the key point of the fusion of potential field data (gravity and magnetic data): the way to fuse the different scales and different dimensions of potential field data into a benchmark and the same surface. Based on this research, we propose a scheme to fuse the multi-dimensional and multi-scale gravity and magnetic data. The synthetic models show that this fusion scheme is able to fuse the multi-dimensional and multi-scale gravity and magnetic data with great fusion results and small errors, in addition, the most important is that the fusion data conform to the characteristics of the potential field data and can meet the needs of data processing in the following steps. One of case studies in China has been accomplished to fuse aeronautical and ground gravity data that are different scales by using this fusion scheme. The fusion scheme we proposed in this study can be used in the fusion of the multi-dimensional (aeronautical, ground and ocean) and multi-scale gravity and magnetic data, which is good for interpretation and popularization.</p>

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207