Using constrained inversion of gravity and magnetic field to produce a 3D litho‐prediction model

References

1. W.D.Goodfellow
   AmesD. and FarrowC.2007. Metallogeny of the Sudbury mining camp, Ontario. In: Mineral deposits of Canada: A synthesis of major deposit‐types, district metallogeny, the evolution of geological provinces, and exploration methods, Special Publication no. 5 (ed W.D.Goodfellow ), pp. 329–350. Mineral Deposits Division, Geological Association of Canada.
2. BaldwinJ., BatemanA. and WheatleyC.1990. Application of neural network to the problem of mineral identification from well logs. The Log Analyst31, 279–293.
   [Google Scholar]
3. BenaoudaD., WadgeG., WhitmarshR.B., RothwellR. and MacLeodC.1999. Inferring the lithology of borehole rocks by applying neural network classifiers to downhole logs: an example from the Ocean Drilling Program. Geophysical Journal International136, 477–491.
   [Google Scholar]
4. BoschM. and McGaugheyJ.2001. Joint inversion of gravity and magnetic data under lithologic constraints. The Leading Edge, 877–881.
   [Google Scholar]
5. BoulangerO. and ChouteauM.2001. Constraints in 3D gravity inversion. Geophysical Prospecting49, 265–280.
   [Google Scholar]
6. CellaF. and FediM.2012. Inversion of potential field data using the structural index as weighting function rate decay. Journal of Geophysical Prospecting60(2), 313–336.
   [Google Scholar]
7. ChasseriauP. and ChouteauM.2003. 3D gravity inversion using a model of parameter covariance. Journal of Applied Geophysics52, 59–74.
   [Google Scholar]
8. DiasF., BarbosaV. and SilvaJ.2009. 3D gravity inversion through an adaptive‐learning procedure. Geophysics74(3), I9–I21.
   [Google Scholar]
9. FarmerR. and AdamsS.J.1998. Facies recognition using neural networks. New Zealand Petroleum Conference, Queenstown, New Zealand.
   [Google Scholar]
10. FarquharsonC.G., AshD. and MillerH.G.2008. Geologically constrained gravity inversion for the Voisey's Bay ovoid deposit. The Leading Edge27, 64–69.
    [Google Scholar]
11. FergosoE. and GallardoL.2009. Cross‐gradients joint 3D inversion with applications to gravity and magnetic data. Geophysics74, L31–L42.
    [Google Scholar]
12. B.Milkereit
    FullagarP.K. and PearsG.A.2007. Towards geologically realistic inversion. In: Proceedings of Exploration 07: Fifth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration (ed B.Milkereit ), pp. 444–460.
    [Google Scholar]
13. GarciaM.H., RabauteA., YvenB. and GuillemotD.2011. Multivariate and spatial statistical analysis of Callovo‐Oxfordian physical properties from lab and borehole logs data: towards a characterization of lateral and vertical spatial trends in the Meuse/Haute‐Marne Transposition Zone. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth36, 1469–1485.
    [Google Scholar]
14. GranekJ.2011. Computing geologically consistent models from geophysical data. Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia, Canada.
15. GRAV3D
    GRAV3D . A Program Library for Forward Modelling and Inversion of Gravity Data over 3D Structures, version 5.0. Developed under the consortium research project, Joint/Cooperative Inversion of Geophysical and Geological Data, UBC‐Geophysical Inversion Facility, Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
16. HaberE. and GazitM.2013. Model fusion and joint inversion. Journal of Survey in Geophysics34, 675–695.
    [Google Scholar]
17. A.Gubins
    KilleenP.1997. Borehole geophysics: exploring the third dimension. In: Proceedings of Exploration 97: Fourth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration (ed A.Gubins ), pp. 31–42.
    [Google Scholar]
18. KonatéA.A., PanH., FangS., AsimS., ZiggahY.Y., DengC.et al. 2015. Capability of self‐organizing map neural network in geophysical log data classification: case study from the CCSD‐MH. Journal of Applied Geophysics118, 37–46.
    [Google Scholar]
19. LelievreP.2009. Integrating geologic and geophysical data through advanced constrained inversions. PhD dissertation, The University of British Columbia, Canada.
20. LiY. and OldenburgD.1996. 3‐D inversion of magnetic data. Geophysics61, 394–408.
    [Google Scholar]
21. LiY. and OldenburgD.1998a. 3‐D inversion of gravity data. Geophysics63, 109–119.
    [Google Scholar]
22. LiY. and OldenburgD.1998b. Separation of regional and residual magnetic field data. Geophysics63(2), 431–439.
    [Google Scholar]
23. MAG3D
    MAG3D . A Program Library for Forward Modelling and Inversion of Magnetic Data over 3D Structures, version 5.0. Developed under the consortium research project, Joint/Cooperative Inversion of Geophysical and Geological Data, UBC‐Geophysical Inversion Facility, Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
24. MahmoodiO. and SmithR.2015. Clustering of downhole physical property measurements at the Victoria property, Sudbury for the purpose of extracting lithological information. Journal of Applied Geophysics118, 145–154.
    [Google Scholar]
25. MahmoodiO., SmithR. and TinkhamD.2016. Supervised classification of down‐hole physical properties measurements using neural network to predict the lithology. Journal of Applied Geophysics124, 17–26.
    [Google Scholar]
26. MaitiS. and TiwariR.2009. A hybrid Monte Carlo method based artificial neural networks approach for rock boundaries identification: a case study from KTB borehole. Pure and Applied Geophysics166, 2059–2090.
    [Google Scholar]
27. MaitiS. and TiwariR.2010. Neural network modelling and an uncertainty analysis in Bayesian framework: a case study from the KTB borehole site. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth.
    [Google Scholar]
28. MaitiS., TiwariR.K. and KumpelH.J.2007. Neural network modelling and classification of lithofacies using well log data: a case study from KTB borehole site. Geophysics Journal International169, 733–746.
    [Google Scholar]
29. McDowellG., FenlonK. and KingA.2004. Conductivity‐based nickel grade estimation for grade control at Inco's Sudbury mines. SEG annual meeting, Denver, USA.
30. McDowellG.M., KingA., LewisR.E., ClaytonE.A. and GrauJ.A.1998. In‐situ nickel assay by prompt gamma neutron activation wireline logging. SEG annual meeting, New Orleans, USA.
31. MoorkampM., LelièvreP., LindeN. and KhanA.2016. Integrated Imaging of the Earth: Theory and Applications. American Geophysical Union.
    [Google Scholar]
32. MwenifumboC. and MwenifumboA.2012. Borehole geophysical logging in the Flin Flon Mining Camp. Geological survey of Canada. Geological Survey of Canada, 75.
    [Google Scholar]
33. OjhaM. and MaitiS.2013. Sediment classification using neural networks: an example from the site‐U1344A of IODP Expedition 323 in the Bering Sea. Deep‐Sea Research II.
    [Google Scholar]
34. PerronG., FullagarP., PearsG., PhillipsN., WillistonC., GerrieV.et al. 2011. 3D litho‐prediction model from in‐situ physical rock property logging and constrained potential fields data inversion. In: Proceedings of 31st Gocad Meeting, Nancy, France.
35. PhillipsN.2001. Geophysical inversion in an integrated exploration program examples from the San Nicolas deposit.MSc thesis, The University of British Columbia, Canada.
    [Google Scholar]
36. PortniaguineO. and ZhdanovM.2002. 3‐D magnetic inversion with data compression and image focusing. Geophysics67, 785–796.
    [Google Scholar]
37. QiL. and CarrT.R.2006. Neural network prediction of carbonate lithofacies from well logs, Big Bow and Sand Arroyo Creek fields, Southwest Kansas. Computers & Geosciences32, 947–964.
    [Google Scholar]
38. RabauteA., YvenB., CheliniW. and ZamoraM.2003. Subsurface geophysics of the Phlegrean Fields: new insights from downhole measurements. Geophysical Research108.
    [Google Scholar]
39. ShamsipourP., SchetselaarE., BellefleurG. and MarcotteD.2014. 3D stochastic inversion of potential field data using structural geologic constraints. Journal of Applied Geophysics111, 173–182.
    [Google Scholar]
40. SpicerB.2016. Geophysical signature of the Victoria property, vectoring toward deep mineralization in the Sudbury Basin. Interpretation4(3), T281–T290.
    [Google Scholar]
41. SpicerB., MorrisB. and UgaldeH.2011. Structure of the Rambler Rhyolite, Baie Verte Peninsula, Newfoundland: inversions using UBC‐GIF Grav3D and Mag3D. Journal of Applied Geophysics75, 9–18.
    [Google Scholar]
42. UBC Geophysical Inversion Facility
    UBC Geophysical Inversion Facility . 2013. A Program Library for Forward Modelling and Inversion of Magnetic Data over 3D Structures, version 5.0.
43. VellaL. and EmersonD.2009. Carrapateena: physical properties of a new Iron‐oxide copper‐gold deposit. ASEG Extended Abstracts, 1–13.
    [Google Scholar]
44. WilliamsN.2008. Geologically constrained UBC‐GIF gravity and magnetic inversions with examples from the Agnew‐Wiluna greenstone belt, Western Australia. PhD thesis, The University of British Columbia, Canada.
    [Google Scholar]
45. B.Milkereit
    WilliamsN. and DippleG.2007. Mapping subsurface alteration using gravity and magnetic inversion models. In: Proceedings of Exploration 07: Fifth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration (ed B.Milkereit ), pp. 461–472.
    [Google Scholar]
46. WongP., JianF. and TaggartL.1995. A critical comparison of neural networks and discriminant analysis in lithofacies, porosity and permeability predictions. Journal of Petroleum Geology18(2), 191–206.
    [Google Scholar]
47. ZeyenH. and PousJ.1993. 3‐D joint inversion of magnetic and gravimetric data with a priori information. Geophysical Journal International112, 244–256.
    [Google Scholar]