MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307665529 · doi:10.2118/211800-ms

DNN Inversion of Gravity Anomalies for Basement Topography Mapping

2022· article· en· W4307665529 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Ashena, Hojjat Kabirzadeh, Xin Wang, Youngsoo Lee, Ik Woo, Mohammed Y. Ali, Jeong Woo Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyInversion (geology)Gravity anomalyRobustness (evolution)Artificial neural networkSubmarine pipelineBasementNonlinear systemSynthetic dataGeodesySeismologyGeophysicsComputer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceGeotechnical engineeringTectonicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A gravity inversion technique using Deep Neural Networks (DNN) was developed to construct the 2D basement topography in offshore Abu Dhabi, UAE. Forward model parameters are set based on the geological features in the study area. Hundreds of thousands of synthetic forward models of the basement and their corresponding gravity anomalies are generated in a relatively short time by applying parallel computing. The simulated data are input to our DNN model which conducts the nonlinear inverse mapping of gravity anomalies to basement topography. To assess the model's robustness against noises, DNN models are retrained using datasets with noise-contaminated gravity data whose performances are evaluated by making predictions on unseen synthetic anomalies. Finally, we employed the DNN inversion model to estimate the basement topography using pseudo gravity anomalies over a profile in offshore UAE.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207