MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293191919 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2022.3153026

3D Finite-Element Forward Modeling of Airborne EM Systems in Frequency-Domain Using Octree Meshes

2022· article· en· W4293191919 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xue Han, Changchun Yin, Yang Su, Bo Zhang, Yunhe Liu, Xiuyan Ren, Jianfu Ni, Colin G. Farquharson

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsSociety for NeuroeconomicsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOctreePolygon meshHexahedronComputational scienceAlgorithmComputer scienceDiscretizationFinite element methodAnomaly (physics)GeologyMathematicsComputer graphics (images)PhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 3-D airborne electromagnetic (AEM) inversions have been restricted by the modeling efficiency resulting from the complex geology in exploration areas and massive amount of data collected by AEM systems. In order to improve the modeling efficiency, we develop an algorithm that combines the hexahedral vector finite element (FE) with octree meshes, in which the boundary conditions are imposed via an algebraic constraint to ensure the continuity of the FE solution. This makes the division with hexahedral meshes more flexible for complex geology such as rugged topography or underground structures so that we can reduce the number of elements while maintaining the accuracy. After formulating the forward problem, we check the accuracy of our algorithm by taking a homogeneous half-space model and comparing the results of our octree method with the semianalytical solutions. Furthermore, we demonstrate the efficiency of our octree method by comparing with the traditional FE method using tetrahedral meshes. Finally, we subdivide a complex topography constructed using the 2-D Gaussian rough surface and calculate the EM responses with and without anomaly embedded. The results show that the EM responses are overwhelmed by the Earth topography. We carry out the topographic correction by taking a method based on the ratio of EM responses with and without anomaly. The experiments show that after topographic correction to AEM data, the response of anomaly becomes more distinguishable so that the anomaly can be clearly identified. Furthermore, we also calculate the EM response for a realistic model—the Ovoid Zone ore body located at Voisey’s Bay, Labrador, Canada, to verify the flexibility and practicality of our algorithm.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207