MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183468528 · doi:10.1142/s259172852130004x

Review of Geoacoustic Inversion in Underwater Acoustics

2021· article· en· W3183468528 on OpenAlexaff
N. Ross Chapman, Er Chang Shang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Theoretical and Computational Acoustics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNaval Nuclear Propulsion Program (Naval Reactors)Innovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsInversion (geology)UnderwaterAttenuationAcousticsGeologyInferenceComputer scienceInverse problemBayesian inferenceAcoustic dispersionBayesian probabilitySeismologyMathematicsOceanographyAcoustic waveArtificial intelligencePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews the progress in geoacoustic inversion over the past several decades. The review is separated into two parts. The first part reviews developments in model-based inversion methods that have led to present day usage of Bayesian inference. Theoretical foundations for the inversion methods are outlined, and limitations of model-based approaches are discussed. Examples are briefly described of applications of model-based inversion with different types of experimental data. The second part reviews recent developments in model-free inversion methods, focusing on discussion of distortion of estimated geoacoustic model parameters caused by model mismatch. It is shown that distortions in estimated model parameters lead to errors in interpreting characteristics of dispersion in the ocean waveguide, in particular the frequency dependence of sound attenuation in marine sediment. This review concludes with perspectives on new directions in research that promise improvement in inversion performance.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations56
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Theoretical and Computational AcousticsSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207