Automatic boundary extraction from magnetic field data using triangular meshes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Boundary extraction is a collective term that we use for the process of extracting the locations of faults, lineaments, and lateral boundaries between geologic units using geophysical observations, such as measurements of the magnetic field. The process typically begins with a preprocessing stage, where the data are transformed to enhance the visual clarity of pertinent features and hence improve the interpretability of the data. The majority of the existing methods are based on raster grid enhancement techniques, and the boundaries are extracted as a series of points or line segments. In contrast, we set out a methodology for boundary extraction from magnetic data, in which we represent the transformed data as a surface in 3D using a mesh of triangular facets. After initializing the mesh, we modify the node locations, such that the mesh smoothly represents the transformed data and that facet edges are aligned with features in the data that approximate the horizontal locations of subsurface boundaries. To illustrate our boundary extraction algorithm, we first apply it to a synthetic data set. We then apply it to identify boundaries in a magnetic data set from the McFaulds Lake area in Ontario, Canada. The extracted boundaries are in agreement with known boundaries and several of the regions that are completely enclosed by extracted boundaries coincide with regions of known mineralization.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".