1887
Volume 34, Issue 1-2
  • ISSN: 0812-3985
  • E-ISSN: 1834-7533

Abstract

Synthetic survey data have been used to evaluate five aerial gamma-ray survey noise-reduction methods, four of them in industry use (NASVD, MNF, eMNF and Mathis adaptive filtering), as well as a new method, CSM. The CSM (short for CSIRO Self Organizing Map) method is based on deriving a self-organizing map from the full spectral data set and replacing individual spectra by others that best match them in a vector distance sense.

Synthetic surveys of 6400 spectra each were prepared to represent:

Case A: uniform ground,

Case B: ground with varying K-U-Th but fixed Th/U ratio,

Case C: ground as for B but with an additional area of different Th/U ratio and,

Case D: ground with uncorrelated K-U-Th concentrations.

For Cases A and B, the CSM and eMNF methods gave similar noise cleaning and best revealed the known Th-U correlation in Case B.

For Case C, both MNF and eMNF showed ghosting in the Th/U ratio in some areas. NASVD did not return the correct Th/U ratio in the area of different Th/U ratio. CSM showed only a small area of ghosting and gave the overall best cleaning. Pre-zoning the data by Th/U ratio and separate processing of the zones is shown to enable the MNF and eMNF methods to avoid ghosting.

For Case D, CSM performed poorly for individual radioelements, whilst the other methods gave some cleaning. However, for the Th/U image, the CSM method gave the best cleaning. This case illustrates the importance of some correlations in the data, for any of the spectral noise cleaning methods to give good results.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/EG03097
2003-03-01
2026-01-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Dickson, B. L., 2003, Recent Advances In Aerial Gamma-Ray Surveying: Journal of Environmental Radioactivity (in press).
  2. Dickson, B. L., and Taylor, G. M., 1998, Noise Reduction of Aerial Gamma-Ray Surveys: Exploration Geophysics, 29, 324-329.
  3. Dickson, B. L., and Taylor, G. M., 1999, Why the maximum noise fraction (MNF) method cleans gamma-ray surveys so well, Preview, #80, 14-17.
  4. Dickson, B. L., and Taylor, G. M., 2000, Maximum Noise Fraction Method Reveals Detail in Aerial Gamma-ray Surveys: Exploration Geophysics, 31, 73-77.
  5. Dickson, B. L., and Taylor, G. M., 2001, Reply to Comments: Exploration Geophysics, 32, 131-134.
  6. Green, A. A., Berman, M., Switzer, P., and Craig, M. D., 1988, A transformation for ordering multispectral data in terms of image quality with implications for noise removal: IEEE Trans. Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 26, 65-74.
  7. Hovgaard, J., and Grasty, R. L., 1997, Reducing statistical noise in airborne gamma-ray data through spectral component analysis: in Gubins, A. G., ed., Proceed. Exploration 97: Fourth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration, 753-764.
  8. Kohonen, T., 2001, Self-Organizing Maps: Series in Information Science, 30, Springer.
  9. Mathis, G. L., 1987, Smoothing spectral gamma logs: a simple but effective technique: Geophysics, 52, 363-367.
  10. Minty, B., and McFadden, P., 1998, Improved NASVD smoothing of airborne gamma-ray spectra: Exploration Geophysics, 29, 516-523.
  11. Minty, B., 2000, Reducing Noise in Airborne Gamma-ray Spectra: Preview, #89, 35-41.
  12. Minty, B. R. S.,2001, Comments on: "Noise reduction of aerial gamma-ray surveys" by Bruce Dickson and Geoffrey Taylor: Exploration Geophysics, 32, 129-130.
/content/journals/10.1071/EG03097
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): gamma-ray survey; noise reduction

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error