MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466239459 · doi:10.2991/iceeg-16.2016.2

Iterative migration of gravity and gravity gradiometry data at Bathurst Mining Camp

2016· article· en· W2466239459 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Le Wan, Michael S. Zhdanov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Utah
KeywordsGeologyGeophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three-dimensional (3D) inversion of full tensor gradiometry (FTG) data continues to be an active area of research and development. We have recently developed a method of potential field migration, which extends to the case of the potential field the general principles of seismic and electromagnetic migration. This new approach provides a rapid method for direct transformation of observed gravity and gravity gradient data into spatial distributions of density. We demonstrate in this paper that migration can be applied iteratively to get more accurate subsurface distributions of the physical properties of rocks. We show that, the iterative migration is practically equivalent to the basic gradient-type inversion algorithms with one very important difference: the gradient directions on each iteration are determined by migration of the corresponding gravity, and gravity gradient data. This is significant because the last transformation is very well developed in the theory of potential field interpretation. In other words, the iterative migration makes it possible to use the powerful and stable technique of upward continuation for the solution of the inverse problem. We present a model study and a case study for the 3D iterative imaging of FTG data from New Brunswick, 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207