MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancing Model Reliability From Tem Data Utilizing Various Multiple Data Strategies

2007· article· en· W2319125231 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ruizhong Jia, R. W. Groom

Bibliographic record

Venue20th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderdetermined systemComputer scienceInversion (geology)Synthetic dataTransmitterAlgorithmData modelingData miningGeologyChannel (broadcasting)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over fifteen years, we have developed and utilized forward and inversion techniques to interpret electromagnetic data collected with various commercial systems. A wide range of survey configurations have been utilized including in-loop and outside-loop measurements with both moving and fixed source configurations and with arbitrary location and orientation of receivers. A variety of different inversion strategies have been developed based on either overdetermined or underdetermined approaches utilizing approaches similar to those that other researchers have adopted. These algorithms have been used extensively in a range of applications including mining exploration and groundwater applications. This experience leads us to the belief that a more comprehensive approach must be taken to ensure reliable results. We have developed inversion algorthms that simultaneously incorporate data from both multiple data components or multiple data locations. Incorporating various data into an inversion process provides better signal-to-noise ratios within the inversion. Applying the inversion on carefully selected data that contain information about different geological structures may enhance the resolution of the inverted models and result in more meaningful models. In this paper, we begin by performing an underdetermined Occam inversion on synthetic data simulated with the configurations where the receiver is inside a transmitter loop (in-loop) or outside a transmitter loop (outside-loop). The inversion technique essentially generates smooth models that fit the data within a prescribed tolerance. We built synthetic layered earth models to generate impulse responses plus Gaussian noise upon which we ran inversion. Specifically, we built the first layered earth model by inserting a conducting layer into a relatively resistive host medium. Our inversion results of this model show that the inversion on either the in-loop data or the outside-loop data can resolve the conducting layer. Further, a joint inversion of both the in-loop and the outside-loop data leads to an<br>improved inversion model. Our second synthetic layered earth model was built by adding a thin conducting overburden to the first model. In this case, our inversion results show that the in-loop data may resolve the top overburden layer better than the outside-loop data. However, the inversion on the inloop data did not resolve the basement, that is, the lower half-space. Moreover, the application of inversion on the outside-loop data may detect the lower half-space, and a joint inversion of both the inloop and the outside-loop data gives rise to an overall improved model with enhanced resolution of both shallower and deeper layers. In short, we utilized synthetic examples to demonstrate that the inversion on the in-loop data tend to resolve the top layers better than the inversion on the outside-loop data while the outside-loop data may see the deeper structures better than the in-loop data, and inverting both the in-loop and the outside-loop data simultaneously may lead to layered earth models of enhanced resolution. We also performed a overdetermined least-squares inversion on a ground data set with a large loop from the Hornby Bay basin in western Nunavut of Canada.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue20th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental ProblemsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207