An Application of loop-loop EM Method for Geotechnical Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loop-loop electromagnetic (EM) survey in frequency domain has been carried out in order to provide basic solution to geotechnical applications. Source and receiver configuration may be horizontal co-planar (HCP) and/or vertical co-planar (VCP). Three quadrature components of mutual impedance ratio for each configuration are used to construct the subsurface image. For the purpose of obtaining the model response and validating the reasonable performance of the inversion, we obtained each responses of two-layered and three-layered earth models and two-dimensional (2-D) isolated anomalous body. The response of 2-D isolated anomalous body has been calculated using extended Born approximation for the solution of 2.5-D integral equation describing EM scattering problem. As a result of the least-squares inversion with variable Lagrangian multiplier, we could construct more resolvable image from HCP data than VCP data. Furthermore, joint inversion of HCP and VCP data made better stability and resolution of the inversion. Resistivity values, however, did not exactly match the true ones. Loop-loop EM field data was obtained with EM34-3XL system manufactured by Geonics Ltd. (Canada). Electrical resistivity survey was conducted on the same line for the comparison in advance. Since the constructed image from loop-loop EM data by 2-D inversion algorithm showed almost similar resistivity distribution to that from electrical resistivity one, we expect the developed 2.5-D loop-loop EM inversion program can be applied for the reconnaissance site survey.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".