MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220965171 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu22-168

Iron deposit effect observed in Kiruna geomagnetic fluctuations: Indications for an improved approach of magnetotellurics searching methods

2022· preprint· en· W4220965171 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bastien Longeon, M. Yamauchi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarth's magnetic fieldAnomaly (physics)MagnetometerMagnetotelluricsGeodesyStandard deviationMagnetic anomalyConductanceGeologyGeophysicsPhysicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryMagnetic fieldMathematicsCondensed matter physicsElectrical resistivity and conductivityStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geomagnetic data at Kiruna station (KIR) in Sweden has been expected to be affected by the iron ore mine because high conductance underground generally means depressed ΔZor dZ/dt compared to ΔH or dH/dt, where Z and H are downward and horizontal components, respectively, Δ indicates deviation, and we took 1-min average of 1-sec resolution data when defining d/dt values. We examined the 1-sec resolution magnetometer data using both frequency-domain (i.e., standard magnetotellurics) and time-domain analyses, and compared general behaviours with the other high-latitude stations on the same longitude (Hornsund: HRN, Abisko: ABK, Lycksele: LYC, Uppsala: UPS, Nurmijärvi: NUR) for the same period (September 2014-2020). Surprisingly, we found KIR anomaly only in time-domain derivative dB/dt and not in the frequency domain spectrum. To quantify this anomaly, we examined the standard deviation of each parameter (1-min average of 1-sec resolution values) over 3 hours. With this quantification, the level of anomaly was about the same between old magnetometer until 2019 and new magnetometer from 2020. The anomaly is somewhat present in both dZ/dt and dH/dt but is the clearest in the ratio of dZ/dt to dH/dt. On the other hand, neither ΔZ nor ΔH showed anomaly. Furthermore, no anomaly is recognized in the inclination I (=atan(Z/H)), i.e., ΔI nor dI/dt. From all of these, we believe that the observed anomaly is caused by underground iron ore deposit and not by the magnetometer filtering setting. The reason why the anomaly is found only in d/dt values is not clear, but we suspect that the iron ore deposit might cause time delay between dZ/dt and dH/dt when step-like variation dominates as the input variation, which is often the case with auroral activity. In such variation, neither the frequency domain analyses, nor simple time domain analyses (ΔB) show any anomaly. We applied this method to the other meridians (three meridians in North America). We could not find any anomaly similar to what KIR data showed. However, we found another type of anomaly (on dI/dt) in Barrow, Alaska. It can be related to its location, surrounded by the arctic sea in both east and west, but we have not yet found an appropriate interpretation. [Acknowledgements: This work resulted from a 2021 summer internship study at the Swedish Institute of Space Physics, Kiruna. The 1-sec resolution geomagnetic data are obtained from INTERMAGNET and are originally provided by SGU (Sweden: UPS, LYC, KIR, ABK), FMI (Finland: NUR), PAS (Poland: BEL, HLP, HRN), GSC (Canada: BLC, CBB, FCC, IQA, OTT, RES, STJ, YKC), USGS (USA: BRW, CMO, FRD, SHU, SIT), IPGP (France: CLF), ZAMF (Austria, WIC), and ASCR (Czech: BDV).]

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207