A comparison of 3-D inversion strategies in the investigation of the 3-D density and magnetic susceptibility distribution in the Great Bear Magmatic Zone, Northwest Territories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inversion of new compilations of aeromagnetic data and gravity data are employed to investigate the 3-D physical property (magnetic susceptibility and density) distribution within the Great Bear magmatic zone. The application of two different software suites (Geosoft VOXI and UBC GIF MAG3D and GRAV3D) affords a comparison of approaches and results. The magnetic susceptibility results are broadly compatible, but Geosoft VOXI enabled more detailed definition of shallow sources. The density results were markedly different in how the model responded to the low-resolution gravity data in characterization of the near-surface. GRAV3D extrapolated shallow sources to surface, whereas Geosoft VOXI smoothed and closed the top of shallow sources below surface. The different magnetic susceptibility and density models can be used to assess the physical property distribution and relationships across the region. One approach, applied here, is to combine the near-surface magnetic susceptibility and density results to identify zones of coincidently high physical properties, a common physical proper relationship associated with IOCG mineral deposits. These integrated models highlight many of the region's known mineral occurrences and reveal other zones for further analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".