1887
Volume 43, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 0812-3985
  • E-ISSN: 1834-7533

Abstract

[

The choice of an appropriate airborne electromagnetic system for a given task should be based on a comparative analysis of candidate systems, consisting of both theoretical considerations and field studies including test lines.

It has become common practice to quantify the system resolution for a series of models relevant to the survey area by comparing the sum over the data of squares of noise-normalised derivatives. We compare this analysis method with a resolution analysis based on the posterior covariance matrix of an inversion formulation. Both of the above analyses depend critically on the noise models of the systems being compared. A reasonable estimate of data noise and other sources of error is therefore of primary importance. However, data processing and noise reduction procedures, as well as other system parameters important for the modelling, are commonly proprietary, and generally it is not possible to verify whether noise figures have been arrived at by reasonable means. Consequently, it is difficult – sometimes impossible – to know if a comparative analysis has a sound basis. Nevertheless, in the real world choices have to be made, a comparative system analysis is necessary and has to be approached in a pragmatic way involving a range of different aspects.

In this paper, we concentrate on the resolution analysis perspective and demonstrate that the inversion analysis must be preferred over the derivative analysis because it takes parameter coupling into account, and, furthermore, that the derivative analysis generally overestimates the resolution capability. Finally we show that impulse response data are to be preferred over step response data for near-surface resolution.

,

In this paper, we compare two ways of analysing resolution in AEM surveys: using the sensitivities, and using the posterior covariance matrix. We apply these to compare two response types, impulse response and step response, and to compare two AEM systems, SkyTEM and TEMPEST, for hydrogeophysically relevant models.

]
ASEG
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/EG12005
2012-12-01
2026-01-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1071/EG12005
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baumgartner F. Christensen N. B. 1998 Analysis and application of a non-conventional underwater geoelectrical method in Lake Geneva, Switzerland. Geophysical Prospecting 46 527 541 10.1046/j.1365‑2478.1998.00107.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2478.1998.00107.x [Google Scholar]
  2. Brodie R. Sambridge M. 2006 A holistic approach to inversion of frequency-domain airborne EM data. Geophysics 71 G301 G312
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Brown V. Hoversten M. Key K. Chen J. 2012 Resolution of reservoir scale electrical anisotropy from marine CSEM data. Geophysics 77 E147 E158
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Christensen N. B. 2000 Difficulties in determining of electrical anisotropy in subsurface investigations. Geophysical Prospecting 48 1 19 10.1046/j.1365‑2478.2000.00174.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2478.2000.00174.x [Google Scholar]
  5. Christensen N. B. Dodds K. 2007 Special section: marine controlled-source electromagnetic methods. 1D inversion and resolution analysis of marine controlled-source EM data. Geophysics 72 WA27 WA38
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Christensen N. B. Sørensen K. I. 2001 Pulled array continuous electrical sounding with an additional inductive source. An experimental design study. Geophysical Prospecting 49 241 254 10.1046/j.1365‑2478.2001.00257.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2478.2001.00257.x [Google Scholar]
  7. Christensen N. B. Reid J. E. Halkjaer M. 2009 Fast, laterally smooth inversion of airborne transient electromagnetic data. Near Surface Geophysics 7 599 612 10.3997/1873‑0604.2009047
    https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2009047 [Google Scholar]
  8. Christiansen, A. V., and Auken, E., 2010, A global measure for depth of investigation in EM and DC modelling: Extended abstracts of the ASEG meeting, Sydney 2010.
  9. Christiansen A. V. Christensen N. B. 2003 A quantitative appraisal of airborne and ground-based transient electromagnetic (TEM) measurements in Denmark. Geophysics 68 523 534
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Christiansen A. V. Auken E. Viezzoli A. 2011 Quantification of modeling errors in airborne TEM caused by inaccurate system description. Geophysics 76 F43 F52 10.1190/1.3511354
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3511354 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fitzpatrick, A., and Munday, T. J., 2005, Forward modelling airborne electromagnetic data for application in mapping the Coffin Bay groundwater lens: CRCLEME restricted report.
  12. Foged, N., Christiansen, A. V., and Auken, E., 2010, Validating SkyTEM data against ground-based TEM data at the Danish national test site by upward continuation: Extended Abstract B27, Near Surface 2010, 16th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 6–8 September 2010, Zurich, Switzerland.
  13. Green, A., and Lane, R., 2003, Estimating noise levels in AEM data: Extended abstracts of the ASEG meeting, Adelaide 2003.
  14. Green A. A. Munday T. 2004 Forward modelling airborne electromagnetic data for the Riverland, S.A.: CRC LEME Open File Report 171, 1–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gunning J. Glinsky M. E. Hedditch J. 2010 Resolution and uncertainty in 1D CSEM inversion: a Bayesian approach and open-source implementation. Geophysics 75 F151 F171
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Inman J. R. Jr. Ryu J. Ward S. H. 1975 Resistivity inversion. Geophysics 38 1088 1108
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lane R. Green A. Golding C. Owers M. Pik P. Plunkett C. Sattel D. Thorn B. 2000 An example of 3D conductivity mapping using the TEMPEST airborne electromagnetic system. Exploration Geophysics 31 162 172 10.1071/EG00162
    https://doi.org/10.1071/EG00162 [Google Scholar]
  18. Lawrie, K. C., Munday, T., Clarke, J. D. A., Fitzpatrick, A., Cullen, K., Apps, H. E., Brodie, R. S., Ransley, T., Cahill, K., Lane, R., Richardson, M., English, P., and Hatch, M., 2009, Broken Hill managed aquifer recharge project: Report no. 2009/03, Geoscience Australia.
  19. Malinverno A. 2002 Parsimoneous Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo inversion in a nonlinear geophysical problem. Geophysical Journal International 151 675 688 10.1046/j.1365‑246X.2002.01847.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2002.01847.x [Google Scholar]
  20. Menke, W., 1989, Geophysical data analysis: Discrete inverse theory: Academic Press Inc.
  21. Minsley B. 2011 A trans-dimensional Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm for model assessment using frequency-domain electromagnetic data. Geophysical Journal International 187 252 272 10.1111/j.1365‑246X.2011.05165.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05165.x [Google Scholar]
  22. Munday, T. J., Brodie, R., Green, A., Lane, R., Sattel, D., Cook, P., Barnett, S., and Walker, G., 2003, Developing recharge reduction strategies in the Riverland of South Australia using airborne electromagnetic data — a case study in tailoring airborne geophysics given a particular target and a desired set of outcomes: Extended Abstracts of the ASEG 16th International Geophysical Conference and Exhibition, Adelaide, 16–19 February 2003.
  23. Oldenburg D. W. Li Y. 1999 Estimating depth of investigation in dc resistivity and IP surveys. Geophysics 64 403 416 10.1190/1.1444545
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444545 [Google Scholar]
  24. Serban D. Z. Jacobsen B. H. 2001 The use of broadband prior covariance for inverse palaeoclimate estimation. Geophysical Journal International 147 29 40 10.1046/j.0956‑540x.2001.01509.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0956-540x.2001.01509.x [Google Scholar]
  25. Sharma S. P. Kaikkonen P. 1999 Appraisal of equivalence and suppression problems in 1D EM and DC measurements using global optimization and joint inversion. Geophysical Prospecting 47 219 249 10.1046/j.1365‑2478.1999.00121.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2478.1999.00121.x [Google Scholar]
  26. Sørensen K. I. Auken E. 2004 SkyTEM – A new high-resolution helicopter transient electromagnetic system. Exploration Geophysics 35 191 199
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Tølbøll R. J. Christensen N. B. 2006 Robust 1D inversion and analysis of helicopter electromagnetic (HEM) data. Geophysics 71 G53 G62 10.1190/1.2187752
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2187752 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1071/EG12005
Loading
Resolution analyses for selecting an appropriate airborne electromagnetic (AEM) system
Exploration Geophysics 43, 213 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1071/EG12005
/content/journals/10.1071/EG12005
/content/journals/10.1071/EG12005
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): electromagnetic; resolution analysis; system comparison; time domain

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