MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923467478

Airborne electromagnetic methods: applications to minerals, water and hydrocarbon exploration

2010· article· en· W2923467478 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyHydrocarbon explorationRemote sensingPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeomorphology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electromagnetic methods have a transmitter that carries a current that varies in magnitude as a function of time.This current has an associated (primary) magnetic field that has a similar time dependence.According to Faraday's law of induction, this time varying field induces currents in conductive features in the ground.These currents have an associated (secondary) magnetic field that can be detected by an electromagnetic receiver.There is no need for the transmitter or the receiver to touch the ground, so electromagnetic systems can be mounted on aircraft and used to cover large areas quickly and efficiently.In time domain EM systems, the time variation of the current is a switch on, followed by a rapid switch off.In general, good conductors have secondary field responses which decay slowly after the switch off.One example from the Shea Creek area of the Athabasca Basin (northern Saskatchewan) shows that these good conductors can be detected at depths as great as 700m when the conductor is large and the intervening material is highly resistive.Poor conductors have responses that decay away rapidly.The alteration above the Millennium deposit (also in the Athabasca Basin) is an example of a response that decays away in about 300 microseconds.Historically, airborne electromagnetic methods have been most successful for massive sulphide exploration.Electromagnetic methods are being utilized in the search for fresh water.In an example from Denmark, the method has been used to successfully map the thickness of a freshwater aquifer.Using airborne methods, an area of more than 100 km2 was covered in a few days surveying, where it would have taken months to cover the same area using ground methods.In sedimentary basins, the decay of the electromagnetic response can be used to infer the conductivity as a function of depth.The shallower part of the section is inferred from the early time data and the late time data is used to estimate the deeper parts of the section.When the ground is about 10 Ohmm, airborne electromagnetic systems can only see about 300 m deep.Hence they cannot see most hydrocarbon deposits.However, electromagnetic methods have been a useful compliment to high resolution seismic in the search for shallow gas in some of the paleochannels in Alberta.They have also been used to better understand the oil sands environment.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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