Gravity profiles interpretation applying a metaheuristic particle optimization algorithm of mineralized bodies resembled by finite elements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interpretation of gravity anomalies is crucial for identifying subsurface mineralized targets and understanding the density variations between the targets and the surrounding structures. To confirm the presence of ore and mineral targets, simple geometric bodies are often used. One of the commonly used global metaheuristic algorithms for gravity data analysis is the particle optimization algorithm. In this study, we employed this method to determine the parameters of buried bodies that resemble finite vertical cylinders by inferring gravity anomalies profiles (amplitude coefficient, depth to top, depth to bottom, origin, and length of the target representing the difference between two depths). The algorithm utilizes particle movement to identify the best way to reach the global or optimum solution. The algorithm's performance was evaluated on synthetic-examples with and without noise (5 % and 10 % levels) and also verified on a real dataset for mineral exploration from Canada. The results showed that the algorithm's stability and accuracy were not affected by the presence of noise and multi-models. Moreover, the field case results were consistent with the existing geological information, borehole data, and previously published outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".