MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408097917 · doi:10.1190/tle44030187.1

Ground-truth-calibrated onshore and offshore subsurface infrastructure image from deep-learning-based 3D inversion of magnetic data

2025· article· en· W4408097917 on OpenAlexaff
Souvik Mukherjee, Jacques Yves Guigné, Gary N. Young, Santi Adavani, Kevin Kennelley, Dillon Hoffmann, Harshit Shukla, Ronald S. Bell, William N. Barkhouse

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubmarine pipelineInversion (geology)Ground truthGeologyGeophysicsArtificial intelligenceRemote sensingSeismologyComputer scienceOceanographyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, we demonstrate the application of deep-learning-based 3D inversion of magnetic data to image subsurface infrastructure. We highlight results from two case studies: an onshore survey at Texas A&M University's Rellis Campus site and an offshore survey in the northern Gulf of Mexico (GOM), off the coast of Louisiana. The onshore case utilized drone-acquired magnetic data to map buried utilities before construction. The offshore case employed a boat-towed magnetometer approximately 3.5 m above the seafloor to locate oil well conductors disrupted by Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and presently buried under 35 to 45 m of sediment. The inversion results at the Rellis site were validated against excavation data, revealing strong agreement in target location and depth (within 17 cm). In the GOM survey, the artificial intelligence (AI)-driven inversion successfully extended conductor imaging beyond the limits of acoustic methods, providing critical information on conductor geometry near the well conductor bay. This work highlights the effectiveness of AI-driven inversion techniques in enhancing subsurface imaging, offering cost-effective and scalable solutions for applications in utility mapping, environmental monitoring, and hazard assessment. The results demonstrate that AI-based workflows can be adapted to various geophysical settings, providing new opportunities for high-resolution imaging of complex subsurface features in onshore and offshore environments.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207