MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320763294 · doi:10.1190/segam2012-0219.1

The modeling of ZTEM data with 2D and 3D algorithms

2012· article· en· W2320763294 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Sattel, Ken Witherly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsCondor Petroleum (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverburdenAmplitudeElectrical conductorConductanceResistive touchscreenAlgorithmConductorGeologyInversion (geology)ConductivityComputer sciencePhysicsSeismologyGeometryMathematicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringCondensed matter physicsOpticsGeotechnical engineeringTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic ZTEM responses computed with 2D and 3D algorithms are compared. Excellent agreement is observed between 2D and 3D responses for structures with long strike lengths. Using the 2D inversion algorithm on synthetic 3D responses indicates artifacts being introduced when limited strike length is present: the conductivity of structures such as resistive hills and conductive structures is underestimated. Synthetic 3D models of a conductive target in a resistive host are used to demonstrate the effect of target strike length and target conductance on the ZTEM response. With an increase in strike length or conductance, the amplitude of the ZTEM responses increases. However, the amplitudes increase unevenly over the range of ZTEM frequencies. For low-conductance targets with short strike lengths the strongest responses are observed at the highest frequencies, whereas for high-conductance targets with long strike lengths the strongest responses are observed at the lowest frequencies. In the presence of a conductive overburden, responses are reduced by overburden blanking, but they can be boosted by current channeling if the conductor is in contact with the overburden. 2D and 3D inversion results of ZTEM survey data from Forrestania, Western Australia, show good agreement. The derivation of pseudo-profiles allowed for the 2D inversion of across-line data, which resulted in the modeling of structures not mapped by the in-line data.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207