MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291752761 · doi:10.1190/image2022-3737909.1

Joint inversion of gravity and magnetic data using indicator functions

2022· article· en· W4291752761 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ke Wang, Dikun Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueSecond International Meeting for Applied Geoscience & Energy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)Joint (building)GeodesyGeologyComputer scienceGeophysicsSeismologyEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gravity and magnetic joint inversion using petrophysical information can recover more accurate geophysical models, but the petrophysical constraints often require complex objective functions. We introduce a simple and efficient mathematical device called indicator functions to couple multiple physical properties determined from petrophysical information. The indicator function is flexible enough to represent arbitrary ranges and relationships of multiple physical property parameters by a set or a union of several subsets. Our objective function combines the indicator function with the L1-norm regularization for more accurate and stable results. Such objective function involving non- differentiable terms is then conveniently solved by an extended version of the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM). ADMM treats each term in the objective function as an independent subproblem that can be solved easily and quickly in parallel, and has the advantage of solving some non-differentiable terms. To demonstrate the performance of the indicator function and ADMM, we apply our method to the gravity and magnetic data synthesized from the realistic model of DO-27 kimberlite pipe at Tli Kwi Cho in northern Canada. The results show that our new inversion method has improved accuracy and efficiency while being simple.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.260
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.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSecond International Meeting for Applied Geoscience & EnergySame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207