MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801959710 · doi:10.1111/1365-2478.12554

3D joint inversion of magnetotelluric and airborne tipper data: a case study from the Morrison porphyry Cu–Au–Mo deposit, British Columbia, Canada

2017· article· en· W2801959710 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsPetro Geotech (Canada)University of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of AlbertaUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
KeywordsMagnetotelluricsGeologyElectrical resistivity and conductivitySeismologyInversion (geology)GeophysicsEconomic geologyMineralogyGeomorphologyTectonicsVolcanism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic and broadband magnetotelluric data were used to determine three‐dimensional electrical resistivity models of the Morrison porphyry Cu–Au–Mo deposit in British Columbia. Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic data are collected with a helicopter, thus allowing rapid surveys with uniform spatial sampling. Ground‐based magnetotelluric surveys can achieve a greater exploration depth than Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic surveys, but data collection is slower and can be limited by difficult terrain. The airborne Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic tipper data and the ground magnetotelluric tipper data show good agreement at the Morrison deposit despite differences in the data collection method, spatial sampling, and collection date. Resistivity models derived from individual inversions of the Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic tipper data and magnetotelluric impedance data contain some similar features, but the Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic model appears to lack resolution below a depth of 1 km, and the magnetotelluric model suffers from non‐uniform and relatively sparse spatial sampling. The joint Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic inversion solves these issues by combining the dense spatial sampling of the airborne Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic technique and the deeper penetration of the lower frequency magnetotelluric data. The resulting joint resistivity model correlates well with the known geology and distribution of alteration at the Morrison deposit. Higher resistivity is associated with the potassic alteration zone and volcanic country rocks, whereas areas of lower resistivity agree with known faults and sedimentary units. The pyrite halo and ≥0.3% Cu zone have the moderate resistivity that is expected of disseminated sulphides. The joint Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic inversion provides an improved resistivity model by enhancing the lateral and depth resolution of resistivity features compared with the individual Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic and magnetotelluric inversions. This case study shows that a joint Z ‐axis tipper electromagnetic–magnetotelluric approach effectively images the interpreted mineralised zone at the Morrison deposit and could be beneficial in exploration for disseminated sulphides at other porphyry deposits.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.203 · 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