MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904606488 · doi:10.1190/geo2018-0102.1

A discussion of 2D induced polarization effects in airborne electromagnetic and inversion with a robust 1D laterally constrained inversion scheme

2018· article· en· W2904606488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Changhong Lin, Gianluca Fiandaca, Esben Auken, Marco Antônio Couto, Anders Vest Christiansen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsInversion (geology)Induced polarizationElectrical resistivity and conductivityElectrical conductorSynthetic dataGeologyConductivityGeophysicsAlgorithmComputer scienceSeismologyPhysicsEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Recently, the interest in the induced polarization (IP) phenomenon in airborne time-domain electromagnetic (ATEM) data has increased considerably. IP may affect the ATEM data significantly and mask underlying geologic structures. To simulate 2D airborne IP data, a 2D finite-element forward-modeling algorithm has been developed with the dispersive conductivity described by the well-known Cole-Cole model. We verify our algorithm by comparison with the 1D solution of the AarhusInv code. Two-dimensional forward responses on six synthetic models, mimicking archetypal 2D conductive and chargeable anomalies, have been generated, and the results indicate that 2D IP affects the data significantly. Differences between the 2D IP responses and the 1D IP responses are evident above the 2D anomalies and at their edges. These differences are similar to what is found when comparing 2D and 1D forward responses over conductive 2D anomalies without considering IP. We evaluate an effective robust inversion scheme to recover the 2D IP parameters using the 1D laterally constrained inversion (LCI) scheme. The inversion of the synthetic data using the robust scheme indicates that not only can the IP parameters be recovered, but also the IP inversions can provide more accurate resistivity sections than a resistivity-only inversion, in terms of resistivity values and anomaly thickness/depth. The field example from Hope Bay area in Canada is even more valuable, considering that part of the profile consists of only negative data, which cannot be inverted with a resistivity-only scheme. Furthermore, the edge effects at the anomaly boundaries are less pronounced in the IP parameters than in the resistivity parameter on the synthetic models with more conductive backgrounds.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations38
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207