Open Access
E3S Web of Conferences
Volume 24, 2017
AG 2017 - 3rd International Conference on Applied Geophysics
Article Number 01002
Number of page(s) 8
Section Geophysics in geoengineering
Published online 20 November 2017
  1. H. M. Joh Ground penetrating radar: theory and applications (Elsevier, 2009) [Google Scholar]
  2. Ł. Ortyl, J. Karczewski, E. Mazurkiewicz, Importance of selecting parameters of georadar profiles in karst area, Proc. of 17th International MtiltidiscipIinary Scientific Geocon fere nee: Science and Technologies in Geology, Exploration and Mining., 173-180 (Albena, Bulgaria, 29 June-5 July 2017) [Google Scholar]
  3. S. Tomecka-Suchoń, Acta Geophys. 60, 386-398 (2012) doi: 10.2478/s 11600-011-0019-z [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. M. de la Vega, A. Osella, E. Lascano, J. M. Carcione, Archaeol. Prospect. 12, 19-30 (2005) doi: 10.1002/aip.244 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Z. Pilecki, J. Kłosiński, E. Pilecka, J. Karczewski, J. Ziętek, Wpływ zawodnienia osuwiska na rozpoznanie granic jego nieciqglosci metodami falowymi Gospod. Surowcami Min. 24, 427-444 (2008) [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  6. J. M. Carcione, Geophysics, 61, 1664-1677 (1996) doi: 10.1190/1.1444085 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. J. M. Carcione, Geophys. Prospect. 44, 871-888 (1996) doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2478.1996.tb00178.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. J. A. Doolittle, N. F. Bellantoni, Journal of Archeological Science, 37, 941-949 (2010) doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2009.11.027 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. J. J. Schultz, M. E. Collins, A. B. Falsetti, J. Forensic Sci. 51, 607-616 (2006) doi: 10.11 11/j. 1556-4029.2006.00129.x [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. J. K. Pringle, J. R. Jems, J. D. Hansen, G. M. Jones, N. J. Cassidy, J. P. Casella, J. Forensic Sci. 57, 1467-1486 (2012) doi: 10.1111/j. 1556-4029.2012.02151.x [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. C. A. Dionne, D. K. Ward law, J. J. Schultz, Delineation and Resolution of Cementary Graves Using Conductivity Meter and Ground-Penetrating Radar. Technical Briefs in Historical Archeology 5, 20-30 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  12. S. C. Buck, J. Forensic Sci., 48, 1-7 (2003) doi: 10.1520/JFS2002165 [Google Scholar]
  13. T. Golebiowski, Environment Engineering, 24, 39-53 (2015) doi: 10.4467/2353737XCT. 15.225.4611 [Google Scholar]
  14. T. Golebiowski, Acta Geophys. 54, 413-429 (2006) doi: 10.2478/sl 1600-006-0027-6 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. H. Marcak, T. Golebiowski, Computer simulation of hydrocarbon flow and wave field for interpretation GPR measurements in contaminated sites. Proc. of 18th Annual Meeting of SAGEHP. Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems. 837-846, (Atlanta, Georgia, 3-7 April 2005) [Google Scholar]
  16. D. Goodman, Y. Nishimura, A ground-radar view of Japanese burial mounds. Antiquity 67, 349-354 (1993) doi: 10.1017/S0003598X00045403 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. J. M. Carcione, Wave Fields in Real Media. Theory and numerical simulation of wave propagation in anisotropic, an elastic, porous and electromagnetic media (Elsevier, 2014) [Google Scholar]
  18. J. Modroo, G. R. Olhoeft, Ground penetrating radar location of buried avalanche victims, Proc. of the 2004 International Snow Science Workshop, (Jackson Hole, Wyoming 19-24 Sep. 2004) [Google Scholar]
  19. J. M. Carcione, Geophysics 75, 53-56 (2010) doi: 10.1190/1.3509472 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. J. M. Carcione, G. Lenzi, S. Valle, Geophys. Prospect. 47, 1015-1029 (1999) doi: 10.1046/j. 1365-2478.1999.00151.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. E. Mazurkiewicz, S. Tomecka-Suchoń, R. Tadeusiewicz, Applied Artificial Intelligence 30, 844-860(2016) doi: 10.1080/08839514.2016.1274250 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. R. Tadeusiewicz, Arch. Min. Sci. 60, 971-984 (2015) doi: 10.1515/amsc-2015-0064 [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.