MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127508581 · doi:10.1111/1365-2478.12308

Trans‐dimensional Bayesian inversion of controlled‐source electromagnetic data in the German North Sea

2015· article· en· W2127508581 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyInversion (geology)Seafloor spreadingGeophysicsSeismologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This paper presents the first controlled‐source electromagnetic survey carried out in the German North Sea with a recently developed seafloor‐towed electrical dipole–dipole system, i.e., HYDRA II. Controlled‐source electromagnetic data are measured, processed, and inverted in the time domain to estimate an electrical resistivity model of the sub‐seafloor. The controlled‐source electromagnetic survey targeted a shallow, phase‐reversed, seismic reflector, which potentially indicates free gas. To compare the resistivity model to reflection seismic data and draw a combined interpretation, we apply a trans‐dimensional Bayesian inversion that estimates model parameters and uncertainties, and samples probabilistically over the number of layers of the resistivity model. The controlled‐source electromagnetic data errors show time‐varying correlations, and we therefore apply a non‐Toeplitz data covariance matrix in the inversion that is estimated from residual analysis. The geological interpretation drawn from controlled‐source electromagnetic inversion results and borehole and reflection seismic data yield resistivities of ∼1 Ωm at the seafloor, which are typical for fine‐grained marine deposits, whereas resistivities below ∼20 mbsf increase to 2–4 Ωm and can be related to a transition from fine‐grained (Holocene age) to unsorted, coarse‐grained, and compacted glacial sediments (Pleistocene age). Interface depths from controlled‐source electromagnetic inversion generally match the seismic reflector related to the contrast between the different depositional environments. Resistivities decrease again at greater depths to ∼1 Ωm with a minimum resistivity at ∼300 mbsf where a seismic reflector (that marks a major flooding surface of late Miocene age) correlates with an increased gamma‐ray count, indicating an increased amount of fine‐grained sediments. We suggest that the grain size may have a major impact on the electrical resistivity of the sediment with lower resistivities for fine‐grained sediments. Concerning the phase‐reversed seismic reflector that was targeted by the survey, controlled‐source electromagnetic inversion results yield no indication for free gas below it as resistivities are generally elevated above the reflector. We suggest that the elevated resistivities are caused by an overall decrease in porosity in the glacial sediments and that the seismic reflector could be caused by an impedance contrast at a thin low‐velocity layer. Controlled‐source electromagnetic interface depths near the reflector are quite uncertain and variable. We conclude that the seismic interface cannot be resolved with the controlled‐source electromagnetic data, but the thickness of the corresponding resistive layer follows the trend of the reflector that is inclined towards the west.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.229 · 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