MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097070530 · doi:10.4133/sageep2013-024.1

APPLICATION OF 3D CSAMT INVERSION TO VARIOUS DATA COMPONENTS AND ITS ENHANCEMENT

2013· article· en· W2097070530 on OpenAlexaff
Ruizhong Jia, R. W. Groom

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems 2013 · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)Computer scienceGeologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have developed 3D inversion algorithms for CSAMT data incorporating a constrained trust-region technique. It is a quasi-Newton method with a fast convergence rate. The inversion can invert, separately or jointly, the electric field, magnetic field and impedance data. There are advantages to this flexibility of inverting such combinations of data components. Inverting certain data components can provide additional insight into the information inherent in the data. It is of importance to select reliable data components to utilize in the inversion. The data selection may involve checking the noise level of each data component and the consistency of electric field and magnetic field, verifying the reliability of impedance data, and choosing frequencies to utilize. We create a synthetic survey and the data are contaminated with various levels of Gaussian random noise. We compare the results of inverting various data components and address importance of selecting appropriate components. A field data case study is presented as well. We also have investigated the possibility of enhancing inversion resolution in a situation where the strike and the dip of the structures is reasonably well known. For such cases, we have experimented with an inversion grids in which the grid cells have a prescribed strike and dip then invert for a conductivity distribution within the dipping grid. Our results appear to demonstrate that incorporating the strike and dip into an inversion significantly improve the resolution of the recovered model at depth. Thus, pointing to another aspect for inversion into research applications separate from the inversion techniques, constraining parameters or the accuracy of the forward simulations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems 2013Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207