{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02190923317683881, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003129890453834116, 'mean_word_length': 5.9135135135135135, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Geometrical and physical parameter comparison between GPR data and other geophysical data

Ground penetrating radar, 2D electric and refraction seismic methods are used to retrieve informations on geometrical, hydrogeological and chemical parameters in fluvial deposits. The results obtained with these methods give consistent informations on geometrical parameters. Indeed, the GPR interval velocities, electrical resistivities and the refraction seismic models show clearly three horizontal layers. Moreover, physical parameters are deduced from GPR and electrical data. Water content estimations of the medium are obtained from GPR data by comparing three different dielectric permittivity models for water-based porous materials: (1) an empirical model, (2) a semi-empirical fully-saturated model based on mixture theory and (3) a fully-saturated model based on the effective medium theory. Qualitative informations on water saturation are also deduced by combining two of these models. Finally, by combining water content estimations obtained from GPR interval velocities and conductivity measurements, a quantitative estimation of the salinity content of the medium is obtained. These studies show concrete applications in fluid's flow and ground contamination monitoring.