MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792581622 · doi:10.1071/aseg2018abm1_1e

Modelling IP effects in airborne time domain electromagnetics

2018· article· en· W2792581622 on OpenAlexaff
D. R. Marchant, Seogi Kang, Mike McMillian, Eldad Haber

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsQuest University CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaGeoscience BC
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTime domainComputer scienceInduced polarizationElectromagneticsInversion (geology)Curse of dimensionalityInterpretation (philosophy)Frequency domainData miningConvolution (computer science)Electronic engineeringMachine learningEngineeringGeologyElectrical engineeringArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of chargeable materials can significantly impact the data in electromagnetic (EM) surveys. This affected data has traditionally been treated as noise that must be removed prior to interpretation or inversion. The ability to extract induced polarization (IP) information from an airborne platform would be a valuable tool in the mineral exploration industry, and thus the pursuit of this ability has recently led to significant interest in the interpretation of IP effects in airborne data. A variety of interpretation methodologies have been proposed to aid in the identification and extraction of information from time domain EM data containing IP effects. Any interpretation scheme needs to be thoroughly tested on realistic synthetic examples so that the strengths and weaknesses of the method are well understood.In this work, we present a methodology for accurately and efficiently simulating the response of a time domain EM experiment by modelling the convolution that occurs in Ohm’s Law in the presence of a frequency dependent conductivity. This method is free of any assumptions about the dimensionality or frequency dependence of the chargeable material and can be used to simulate the response of any time domain system.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207