MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410763557 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2024-0781

Data-driven recovery of incomplete geotechnical dataset using low-rank matrix completion

2025· article· en· W4410763557 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zheng Guan, Yu Wang, Kok‐Kwang Phoon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringRank (graph theory)GeologyMatrix (chemical analysis)MathematicsMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real geotechnical data from a typical site might be characterized as MUSIC-X (i.e., multivariate, uncertain, unique, sparse, incomplete, and potentially corrupted, with X denoting spatial/temporal variability). One of the key challenges in developing site-specific statistical models for multiple geotechnical properties (i.e., multivariate) is missing (or incomplete) values from different tests at various depths/locations. This raises a critical question in geotechnical site investigations: how to recover the missing values in real geotechnical datasets from available measurements by leveraging the underlying structure of geotechnical datasets? Since different geotechnical properties are not only correlated among different properties, but also auto-correlated across different depths, this suggests that a simple underlying structure with only a limited number of important features/patterns might exist for multivariate geotechnical datasets. Leveraging on this observation, this study proposes a novel, data-driven method for predicting missing values by low-rank matrix completion. The proposed method exploits the auto- and cross-correlation structures of different test data. Missing values are then recovered using a singular value thresholding algorithm, and a k-fold cross-validation strategy is employed to determine the level of measurement noise. The method is illustrated and validated using a real geotechnical dataset. The results indicate that the proposed method can provide reliable predictions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.277
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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical Journal→Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques→French-language works237,207→