MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516260044 · doi:10.1190/segam2016-13685551.1

Using constrained inversion of gravity and magnetic field to produce a 3D litho-prediction model

2016· article· en· W2516260044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Omid Mahmoodi, Richard S. Smith, Bill Spicer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)GeologyGeophysicsMagnetic fieldGeodesyComputer scienceSeismologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geologically constrained inversion of gravity and magnetic field data of the Victoria property (located in Sudbury, Canada) was undertaken in order to update the present three dimensional (3D) geological model. The initial and reference model (used to constrain the inversion) was constructed based on geological information from approximately 965 drillholes. As well, down-hole density and magnetic susceptibility measurements of seven holes were statistically analyzed to derive lower and upper bounds on the physical properties of the lithological units in the reference model. A neural network was trained to predict lithological units from the physical properties measured in seven holes. Then, the trained network was applied on the 3D distribution of physical properties derived from the inversion models to produce a 3D litho-prediction model. Some of the features evident in the lithological model are remnants of the constraints, where the data did not demand a significant change in the model from the initial constraining model. However other changes from the initial model are evident, for example: a larger body was predicted for quartz diorite which may be related to the prospective offset dykes; a new zone was predicted as sulfide which may represent potential mineralization; and a geophysical subcategory of metabasalt was identified with high magnetic susceptibility and high density. The litho-prediction model agrees with the geological expectation for the 3D structure at Victoria, and is consistent with the geophysical data, which results in a more holistic understanding of the subsurface lithology. Presentation Date: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 Start Time: 1:00:00 PM Location: 168 Presentation Type: ORAL

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 score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207