MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200200371 · doi:10.1190/geo2021-0032.1

Potential field data interpolation by Taylor series expansion

2021· article· en· W4200200371 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
涛 陈, Dikun Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province
KeywordsInterpolation (computer graphics)Taylor seriesMultivariate interpolationSeries (stratigraphy)Data pointRemainderGridAlgorithmRobustness (evolution)Field (mathematics)Computer scienceMathematicsBilinear interpolationMathematical analysisGeometryGeologyStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Data interpolation is critical in the analysis of geophysical data when some data are missing or inaccessible. We interpolate irregular or missing potential field data using the relation between adjacent data points inspired by the Taylor series expansion (TSE). The TSE method first finds the derivatives of a given point near the query point using data from neighboring points and then uses the Taylor series to obtain the value at the query point. The TSE method works by extracting local features represented as derivatives from the original data for interpolation in the area of data vacancy. Compared with other interpolation methods, the TSE provides a complete description of potential field data. Specifically, the remainder in TSE can measure local fitting errors and help obtain accurate results. Implementation of the TSE method involves two critical parameters — the order of the Taylor series and the number of neighbors used in the calculation of derivatives. We find that the first parameter must be carefully chosen to balance between the accuracy and numerical stability when data contain noise. The second parameter can help us build an over-determined system for improved robustness against noise. Methods of selecting neighbors around the given point using an azimuthally uniform distribution or the nearest-distance principle are also presented. Our approach is first illustrated by a synthetic gravity data set from a single survey line, and then it is generalized to the case over a survey grid. In both numerical experiments, the TSE method demonstrates an improved interpolation accuracy in comparison with the minimum curvature method. Finally, we apply the TSE method to a ground gravity data set from the Abitibi Greenstone Belt, Canada, and an airborne gravity gradient data set from the Vinton Dome, Louisiana, USA.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207