MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283738738 · doi:10.1190/tle41070454.1

Open-source software for two-dimensional Fourier processing of gridded magnetic data

2022· article· en· W4283738738 on OpenAlexafffund
Richard S. Smith, Eric Roots, Desmond Rainsford

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaLaurentian University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPython (programming language)Computer scienceFast Fourier transformComputational sciencePreprocessorSoftwareFourier transformProgramming languageApplication programming interfaceAlgorithmParallel computingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Magnetic data are widely available and useful in many exploration and applied-geophysics projects. The magnetic data are usually processed, imaged, and interpreted in commercial software packages. The algorithms used in these packages are sometimes difficult to check or tune, and the code is not available for review. However, these packages often have an application programming interface (API) for people to access data and undertake their own processing and data enhancement. In many cases, these APIs use the Python programming language. In the course of developing a new method for transforming magnetic data called reduction to pole and vertical dip (RTPVD), the initial test code was written in Python. This initial code was then rewritten and incorporated into GAMS, an open-source software package capable of using a Python API to read from and then write transformed (or enhanced) data to a commercial database. In addition to RTPVD, the other enhancements GAMS can generate are the zeroth-order analytic-signal amplitude (ASA0), tilt, spatial derivatives of ASA0, the zeroth-order local wavenumber, the first-order analytic-signal amplitude, and the apparent susceptibility. These transformations require that the data be transformed to the wavenumber domain using a fast Fourier transform (FFT), operated on, and then transformed back to the space domain. The FFT and some of the preprocessing steps can be done with a number of built-in Python tools. For the preprocessing steps, some of the available Python options are fast, but they can occasionally introduce unwanted artifacts. Our open-source tool allows users to test the different options and check the intermediate steps to ensure the result is appropriate.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207