MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An accurate and robust multigrid algorithm for 2D forward resistivity modelling

2004· article· en· W1976276239 on OpenAlexaff
R. Moucha, R. C. Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStencilMultigrid methodGridAnisotropyApplied mathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsMathematical analysisGeometryPhysicsComputational sciencePartial differential equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present an adaptation of the full multigrid algorithm in DC resistivity modelling in an effort to increase its accuracy. There is a great difficulty with conventional multigrid solvers in representing the physics of an arbitrary distribution of electrical conductivity on a very coarse grid. In general, conventional rectangular finite‐difference or 5‐point approximations of Poisson's equation cannot represent, at a coarse grid level, the effective anisotropy on a coarse scale which results from fine structure in the model. An exception to this generalization occurs when the principal axes of structural anisotropy are aligned with the coordinate axis. Additional and similarly generated problems arise when a coarse cell is obliged to represent fine structure containing very high conductivity contrasts. We have developed an adaptation of the usual resistive‐network representation of the continuum, which avoids some of these problems, and have compared it with the traditional resistive network currently used. The network adaptation consists of replacing the usual 5‐point Laplacian operator stencil used on the finite‐difference grid with a 9‐point stencil, and the conductivity scalar with a 6‐parameter conductivity parametrization. This parametrization permits representation of arbitrarily orientated anisotropy as well as more complex behaviour related to high conductivity contrasts. The importance of multigrid solvers does not lie in their speed at forward modelling (which is comparable with other methods), but rather in their potential for inverse modelling. Inverse solvers which proceed by refinement of an initially very coarse solution can, in principle, take time only linearly proportional to the number of gridpoints in the final desired model.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical ProspectingSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207