MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353064251 · doi:10.3390/eng4010059

A Critical Review and Bibliometric Analysis on Applications of Ground Penetrating Radar in Science Based on Web of Science Database

2023· review· en· W4353064251 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEng—Advances in Engineering · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarScience Citation IndexWeb of scienceSubject (documents)CitationCitation indexLibrary scienceGeographyRadarComputer sciencePolitical scienceMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is an established technology with a wide range of applications for civil engineering, geological research, archaeological studies, and hydrological practices. In this regard, this study applies bibliometric and scientometric assessment to provide a systematic review of the literature on GPR-related research. This study reports the publication trends, sources of publications and subject categories, cooperation of countries, productivity of authors, citations of publications, and clusters of keywords in GPR-related research. The Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) and the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), which can be accessed through the Web of Science Core Collection, are used as references. The findings report that the number of publications is 6880 between 2001 and 2021. The number of annual publications has increased significantly, from 139 in 2001 to 576 in 2021. The studies are published in 894 journals, and the annual number of active journals increased from 68 in 2001 to 215 in 2021. Throughout the study, the number of subject categories involved in GPR-related research fluctuated, ranging from 38 in 2001 to 68 in 2021. The research studies originated from 118 countries on 6 continents, where the United States and the People’s Republic of China led the research articles. The top five most common keywords are ground-penetrating radar, non-destructive testing, geophysics, electrical resistivity tomography, and radar. After investigating the clusters of keywords, it is determined that civil engineering, geological research, archaeological studies, and hydrological practices are the four main research fields incorporating GPR utilization. This study offers academics and practitioners an in-depth review of the latest research in GPR research as well as a multidisciplinary reference for future studies.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0380.239
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.349 · 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