Case histories illustrating the characteristics of the Heligeotem System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The HeliGEOTEM system was introduced in 2005 to provide greater operational flexibility and improved lateral resolution compared with a fixed-wing system (Fountain et al., 2005). The system, described in more detail by Fountain et al. (2005), is a vertical-axis dipole transmitter towed below and behind a helicopter. The receiver, also attached to the tow cable is about 15 m in front and 35 m above the transmitter. The system measures the response in the time domain when a half-sine current pulse excites the ground. The dB/dt and B-field responses are measured in the x, y and z orientations. Compared with fixed-wing systems, the helicopter systems have their transmitter / receiver closer to the ground surface, which is why the spatial resolution is greater (the response is much sharper); also, the response of shallow bodies is much larger. However, when the bodies are deeper, the responses are more comparable. Since its introduction, the HeliGEOTEM airborne electromagnetic (AEM) system has undergone a number of improvements. The introduction of broadband coils results in greater sensitivity to poor conductors. Increases in the dipole moment (signal level) and reductions in the noise level have improved the signal to noise ratio, allowing the response of deeper conductors to be detected. These characteristics are illustrated with case histories from the Sudbury and Timmins areas of Ontario, Canada and the Mattagami area of Quebec, Canada. A comparison with data from the DighemV AEM system flown at Maimon, Dominican Republic, shows that the HeliGEOTEM is able to see deeper than DighemV, but does not have quite as good capability to resolve features close to the surface. Another comparison in an area of northern Alberta shows that the HeliGEOTEM has poorer resolution compared to the frequency-domain RESOLVE system, but better near-surface resolution that the fixed-wing GEOTEM system. This example is also used to illustrate the depth of penetration of the three systems in a conductive environment. Also, interpretation and display tools developed for fixed-wing systems can also be applied to the HeliGEOTEM data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".