MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386736820 · doi:10.1111/1365-2478.13427

2D fast Fourier transform analytical solutions in all space for all gravity and magnetic components

2023· article· en· W4386736820 on OpenAlexaffabout
O Boulanger

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFourier transformPrismComputationDiscrete Fourier transform (general)Interpolation (computer graphics)AlgorithmPseudo-spectral methodGravitational fieldWavenumberFrequency domainFourier analysisMathematical analysisGeometryGeologyComputer scienceFractional Fourier transformOpticsPhysicsMathematicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Forward modelling of potential field data is an important part of optimization algorithms used to invert large datasets such as those involving rugged terrain or borehole data. Two‐dimensional fast Fourier transform modelling with a prism or a dipole is one of the most efficient methods compared to the forward modelling in the space domain. However, the exact solution of a prismatic source is limited to the case of a half‐space with the computation of data on a horizontal datum above the topography. Starting from the three‐dimensional Fourier forward modelling analytical formulation for a prism, an integration according to the wavenumber w is accomplished which allowed to find a two‐dimensional Fourier exact analytical formulation outside, at the interfaces of, and inside a prism for all potential field components. This new formulation requires the calculation of only four integrals. The gravity and magnetic fields are computed with this two‐dimensional fast Fourier transform formulation in the entire domain and compared with the analytical space domain and the three‐dimensional fast Fourier transform formulations. From the three‐dimensional calculated field, each component can be interpolated with the tri‐linear interpolation method along a borehole or on a drape surface simulating an airborne survey. Based on experiments demonstrated in this work, the two‐dimensional formulation in the Fourier domain gave accurate results with greater speed of execution in comparison to modelling in the space domain. The forward modelling method is tested on real gravity data from the north of Alberta (Canada).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical ProspectingSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207