MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089462764 · doi:10.1190/tle39100702.1

Quality estimation of magnetotelluric impedance tensors using neural networks

2020· article· en· W3089462764 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Naoto Imamura, Adam Schultz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetotelluricsArtificial neural networkData qualityGeophysicsWorkflowComputer scienceData miningPython (programming language)Data setQuality assuranceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceGeologyDatabaseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract While much of the workflow for geophysical data processing and analysis is automated, final quality assurance typically requires the decisions of skilled human analysts and interpreters. The quality and reliability of geophysical inverse models depends directly on the effectiveness of input data. The influence of spurious data on derived data products used in the inversion has been reduced by this effectiveness. Failure to identify and mitigate bias in data products can lead to costly errors. By applying supervised machine learning (ML), a neural network can be trained to recognize features in data that a human domain expert would identify as characteristic of poor data quality. In this study, we use magnetotelluric (MT) data as an example of a geophysical data set appropriate for such a training exercise. While MT data are used to estimate the resistivity structure of the subsurface, the concepts we discuss are universal to seismic, potential fields, and other geophysical data sets. We train a neural network, pyMAGIQ (Python-based magnetotelluric impedance qualifier), with multiple hidden layers and demonstrate that it successfully generates the nonlinear mapping function required to assess the quality of MT data. The training set is a large database of frequency-domain MT impedance tensors from the National Science Foundation-funded EarthScope MT project. A human-assigned quality index is associated with each impedance. We apply pyMAGIQ to unrated MT data from the United States and Canada and confirm that the ML-assigned quality factors are consistent with those assigned by trained human operators. We also apply sensitivity analysis to the trained neural network. This reveals that the human- and ML-assigned data quality index depends on the magnitude of the confidence limits on (1) the phases and (2) the continuity of the apparent resistivities and phases with respect to frequency.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207