MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283749320 · doi:10.1190/tle41070462.1

High-resolution imaging of subsurface infrastructure using deep learning artificial intelligence on drone magnetometry

2022· article· en· W4283749320 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald S. Bell, William N. Barkhouse, Santi Adavani, Peter G. Lelièvre, Colin G. Farquharson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandMount Allison University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceGround truthDroneDeep learningGeophysicsGeophysical imagingMachine learningRemote sensingGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The use of drones fo r geophysical data acquisition and artificial intelligence (AI) for geophysical data processing, imaging, and interpretation are active focus areas in current industry and academic applications. Unlocking their cumulative potential in single-focus applications can have a transformative impact, possibly leading to dramatic cost reductions in key use cases and new application areas for enhanced actionable business intelligence. We present field study results from Texas and California that show the potential for imaging pipelines and other subsurface infrastructure by using AI-based methods on high-resolution aboveground magnetic data. The superior resolution and interpretability over conventional geophysical inversion is demonstrated. The method has the potential to provide actionable intelligence in several business-use cases for detecting and characterizing pipelines, crossing zones for multiple pipes, etc. at dramatically reduced costs. The advanced algorithms and workflows used resulted in a 100-fold increase in efficiency and delivered results in two days compared to what could take several months using generally available open-source deep learning AI workflows and software. Future direction of development is to validate against excavation-/drill-bit-/inline-tool-based ground truth and further extend and develop this process to deliver near real-time results. The techniques used are general and can be applied to other geophysical data including seismic, electromagnetic, and gravity at various scales and resolution.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207