A short user guide for UBC-GIF gravity and magnetic inversions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obtaining reliable predictions of the subsurface will provide a critical advantage for explorers seeking mineral deposits at depth and beneath cover. A common approach in achieving this goal is to use deterministic property-based inversion of potential field data to predict a 3D subsurface distribution of physical properties that explain measured gravity or magnetic data. The non-uniqueness of inversions of potential field data mandates careful and consistent parameterization of the problem to ensure realistic solutions. Including all prior geological knowledge as constraints on the inversion also helps ensure that the recovered predictions are consistent with both the geophysical data and the geological knowledge.We review how potential field inversions are best applied for mineral exploration problems using the UBC-GIF inversion algorithms. We use examples to emphasise the importance of mesh design and applying appropriate data processing, and identify the approach for defining key parameters such as data uncertainty, potential field weighting functions, and numerical parameters that approximate prior geological knowledge of in situ trends, geometries and properties. Consistent application of these techniques will ensure the most reliable predictive physical property models for explorers.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".