MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200423267 · doi:10.1190/geo2020-0729.1

Joint inversion of gravity and gravity gradient data: A systematic evaluation

2021· article· en· W4200423267 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Capriotti, Yaoguo Li

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWavelengthInversion (geology)GeologyGravity anomalyWeightingGeodesySynthetic dataNoise (video)Computer scienceGeophysicsAlgorithmPhysicsOpticsAcousticsSeismologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Gravity and gravity gradiometry measurements are commonly used to map density variations in the subsurface. Gravity measurements can characterize gravitational anomalies at long and short wavelengths effectively, but the cost of collecting a sufficiently spatially dense survey to characterize the short wavelengths can be prohibitive. Gravity gradient data can be quickly collected with short-wavelength information at a low noise level, but they have decreasing sensitivity to longer wavelengths. We have described a method to jointly invert gravity and gravity gradient data that takes advantage of the differing frequency contents and noise levels of the two methods to create an improved image of the subsurface. Previous work treated the inversion as a multiple component gravity inversion; however, this can cause unintended errors in the recovered models because each data set is not guaranteed to be fit within its noise level. Our joint inversion methodology ensures that the gravity and gravity gradient data sets are fit within their individual noise levels by incorporating a relative weighting parameter, and we describe how to find that parameter. This method can also be used to create an improved broadband gravity anomaly map that has a reduced noise level at long wavelengths using a joint equivalent source reconstruction. We first build a synthetic model using a Minecraft world editor that has different wavelength anomalies, and find the improvement with joint inversion. These results are also confirmed using a real-world example at the R. J. Smith test range in Kauring, Australia.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207