MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392012026 · doi:10.1190/geo2024-0107.1

Anisotropic induced polarization modeling with neural networks and effective medium theory

2024· preprint· en· W4392012026 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles L. Bérubé, Jean-Luc Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnisotropyArtificial neural networkPolarization (electrochemistry)Induced polarizationPolarizabilityComputer scienceStatistical physicsElectrical resistivity and conductivityGeologyPhysicsMachine learningOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Interpreting 3D induced polarization (IP) data requires rock-physics models that reflect the omnipresent anisotropy of the earth’s crust. The generalized effective medium theory of induced polarization (GEMTIP) can model the IP signatures of rocks with polarizable mineral inclusions. However, it is computationally demanding because it requires numerically solving the depolarization tensors of each inclusion. We aim to streamline GEMTIP simulations by (1) integrating the anisotropic background conductivity and triaxial ellipsoidal inclusions in the model and (2) estimating the depolarization tensors with a neural network. We validate the neural network predictions against the known solutions for spherical and spheroidal inclusions, and we test our method using data from an actual rock sample. The neural network indicates a relative sensitivity of 56% to the inclusion shape and 44% to the host rock anisotropy and is up to 100,000 times faster than numerical integration. We release the pretrained neural network implementation as an open-source Python package, thereby providing a new method to interpret the IP signatures of anisotropic rocks.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207