MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224443404 · doi:10.1063/5.0088254

Anomaly detection of complex magnetic measurements using structured Hankel low-rank modeling and singular value decomposition

2022· article· en· W4224443404 on OpenAlexaff
Xinglin Zhang, Huan Liu, Zehua Wang, Haobin Dong, Jian Ge, Zheng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSingular value decompositionAlgorithmRank (graph theory)Noise (video)Singular valueMagnetic anomalySingular spectrum analysisAnomaly detectionComputer sciencePrincipal component analysisMathematicsPhysicsArtificial intelligenceEigenvalues and eigenvectorsGeophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The magnetic anomalies generated by the ferromagnetic targets are usually buried within uncontrollable interference sources, such as the power frequency and random noises. In particular, the variability of the geomagnetic field and the low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the magnetic anomalies cannot be avoided. In this paper, to improve the performance of magnetic anomaly detection (MAD) with a low SNR, we propose a novel structured low-rank (SLR) decomposition-based MAD method. In addition, a new framework based on the SLR and singular value decomposition (SVD) is constructed, dubbed SLR-SVD, and the corresponding working principle and implemented strategy are elaborated. Through comparing the SLR-SVD with two state-of-the-art methods, including principal component analysis and SVD, the results demonstrate that the proposed SLR-SVD can not only suppress the noise sufficiently, i.e., improving 55.26% approximately of the SNR, but also retain more boundary information of magnetic anomalies, i.e., decreasing approximately 68.05% of the mean squared error and improving approximately 28.47% of the structural similarity index.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.819

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207