MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005546930 · doi:10.1190/geo2019-0244.1

Sparse magnetic vector inversion in spherical coordinates

2020· article· en· W3005546930 on OpenAlexaff
Dominique Fournier, Lindsey J. Heagy, Douglas W. Oldenburg

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetizationInversion (geology)RemanenceCartesian coordinate systemGeologyAlgorithmGeometryComputer scienceMagnetic fieldMathematicsPhysicsTectonicsSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Magnetic vector inversion (MVI) has received considerable attention over recent years for processing magnetic field data that are affected by remanent magnetization. However, the magnetization models obtained with current inversion algorithms are generally too smooth to be easily interpreted geologically. To address this, we have reviewed the MVI formulated in a spherical coordinate system. We tackle convergence issues posed by the nonlinear transformation from Cartesian to spherical coordinates by using an iterative sensitivity weighting approach and a scaling of the spherical parameters. The spherical formulation allows us to impose sparsity assumptions on the magnitude and direction of magnetization independently and, as a result, the inversion recovers simpler and more coherent magnetization orientations. The numerical implementation of our algorithm on large-scale problems is facilitated by discretizing the forward problem using tiled octree meshes. All of our results are generated using the open-source SimPEG software. We determine the enhanced capabilities of our algorithm on a large airborne magnetic survey collected over the Kevitsa Ni-Cu-platinum group elements (PGE) deposit. The recovered magnetization direction inside the ultramafic intrusion and in the host stratigraphy is consistent with laboratory measurements and provides evidence for tectonic deformation.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.210
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 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

Citations44
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207