The Valen Prospect: It's SPM,... No it's not,...Yes it is!.. No wait....
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The choice of systems and interpretation approaches for the exploration for critical mineral systems under a complex and varying regolith cover using airborne electromagnetics, can be informed by forward modelling methods. However, the direct assessment of systems and modelling algorithms using data acquired under real survey conditions can be equally informative. For example, it provides an opportunity to assess the effects of real geological variability and noise, arising in a true survey configuration for different systems, and the artefacts that may result from the use of different inversion codes. Here we discuss the application of 1, 2 and 3D inversion approaches to resolving the geometry and complexity of the geology in an area on the South Australian side of the Musgrave province and consider modelled responses from coincident lines of fixed wing (SPECTREM-Plus and TEMPEST - High Moment), and heliborne (VTEM and SkyTEM) time domain EM systems over a known (from ground EM and drilling) deep, steeply dipping, conductor - the Valen Prospect. All inversion methods and AEM systems contributed to our understanding of geological variability and structural complexity, although all generate smoothed versions of geological reality. Results from the 1D inversions appear to map geological variability and complexity in the near surface (regolith character?) in greater detail compared to those from the 2 and 3D inversions, even though the geology is recognisably 3D in character. The Valen Prospect characterised as a distinct, small, and narrow late time anomaly, is modelled in 1D, albeit deeper than drilling and ground EM suggests. While the 2 and 3D models have good global data fits, in some instances they failed to fit measured data at late time, consequently overlooking Valen. It was suggested that problems with fitting the anomaly at late times may be the result of regolith-related superparamagnetism (SPM) in the near surface which often beset AEM data sets in Australian settings. However, decay-rate analysis of the Valen anomaly suggests a deep conductor response for the SkyTEM, SPECTREM and TEMPEST systems. The decay rate of the corresponding VTEM anomaly suggests an SPM response. However, the shape of the VTEM decay also suggests the presence of deeper conductive material.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.012 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".