MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100287217

THE UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY An Analysis of the Combination and Downward Continuation of Satellite, Airborne and Terrestrial Gravity Data

2003· article· en· W7100287217 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeoidContinuationGravitational fieldGravity of EarthVertical deflectionGeopotentialGravity anomaly
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An analysis of the combination and downward continuation of satellite, airborne and terrestrial gravity data is presented. The thesis encompasses theoretical investigations of the underlying model problems and a numerical study using simulated and real data. The downward continuation of gravity data is inherently unstable and requires reg-ularization, iteration or filtering methods to obtain a stable solution. This research scrutinizes several regularization methods for the downward continuation of airborne and terrestrial gravity data. All of them can be considered as filtered least-squares solutions. Additionally, an alternative numerical method is developed and compared to the other methods. It provides a considerable improvement in terms of numerical efficiency and accuracy when the assumptions for the method are satisfied. With newly available satellite gravity data, additional low-frequency information about the gravity field can be obtained. Since applications such as geoid determi-nation and resource exploration demand a much higher resolution than resolved by satellite-only models, the combination with data collected closer to the Earth’s surface is essential. In this research, local airborne and terrestrial gravity data have been used. Several combination strategies are proposed and implemented. The feasibility of the combination strategies is demonstrated for a local data area close to Ottawa, Canada. The results indicate that a combination of satellite, airborne and terrestrial gravity is beneficial both in terms of accuracy and resolution. A combined local geoid and a high-degree spherical harmonic model up to degree and order 900 are developed. The results show a geoid accuracy in the cm-range for the test area. iii

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207