oa Research note: A comparison between normalized controlled‐source electromagnetic field components and transfer functions as input data for three‐dimensional non‐linear conjugate gradient inversion

References

1. Bastani, M. (2001) EnviroMT ‐ A New Controlled Source/Radio Magnetotelluric System. Ph.D. thesis, Uppsala University.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bretaudeau, F. & Coppo, N. (2016) A pseudo‐MT formulation for 3D CSEM inversion with a single transmitter. In EMIW2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
3. Castillo‐Reyes, O., Rulff, P., Schankee, E. & Adrian, U. (2023) Meshing strategies for 3D geo‐electromagnetic modeling. Computational Geosciences, 27, 1023–1039.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Commer, M. & Newman, G.A. (2008) New advances in three‐dimensional controlled‐source electromagnetic inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 172(2), 513–535.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Grayver, A.V., Streich, R. & Ritter, O. (2013) Three‐dimensional parallel distributed inversion of CSEM data using a direct forward solver. Geophysical Journal International, 193(3), 1432–1446.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Grayver, A.V., Streich, R. & Ritter, O. (2014) 3D inversion and resolution analysis of land‐based CSEM data from the Ketzin CO2 storage formation. Geophysics, 79(2), E101–E114.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Heagy, L.J., Cockett, R., Kang, S., Rosenkjaer, G.K. & Oldenburg, D.W. (2017) A framework for simulation and inversion in electromagnetics. Computers and Geosciences, 107, 1–19.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Kalscheuer, T., Blake, S., Podgorski, J.E., Wagner, F., Green, A.G., Muller, M., Jones, A.G., Maurer, H., Ntibinyane, O. & Tshoso, G. (2015) Joint inversions of three types of electromagnetic data explicitly constrained by seismic observations: results from the central Okavango Delta, Botswana. Geophysical Journal International, 202(3), 1429–1452.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Kalscheuer, T., Garcia Juanatey, M., Meqbel, N. & Pedersen, L.B. (2010) Non‐linear model error and resolution properties from two‐dimensional single and joint inversions of direct current resistivity and radiomagnetotelluric data. Geophysical Journal International, 182(3), 1174–1188.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Kalscheuer, T., Hübert, J., Kuvshinov, A., Lochbühler, T. & Pedersen, L.B. (2012) A hybrid regularization scheme for the inversion of magnetotelluric data from natural and controlled sources to layer and distortion parameters. Geophysics, 77(4), E301–E315.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Kelbert, A., Meqbel, N., Egbert, G.D. & Tandon, K. (2014) ModEM: A modular system for inversion of electromagnetic geophysical data. Computers and Geosciences, 66, 40–53.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Key, K. (2016) MARE2DEM: A 2‐D inversion code for controlled‐source electromagnetic and magnetotelluric data. Geophysical Journal International, 207(1), 571–588.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Li, X. & Pedersen, L.B. (1991) Controlled source tensor magnetotellurics. Geophysics, 56(9), 1456–1461.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Nazari, S., Rochlitz, R. & Günther, T. (2023) Optimizing semi‐airborne electromagnetic survey design for mineral exploration. Minerals, 13(6), 796.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Newman, G.A. & Alumbaugh, D.L. (1997) Three‐dimensional massively parallel electromagnetic inversion ‐ I. Theory. Geophysical Journal International, 128(2), 345–354.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Newman, G.A. & Alumbaugh, D.L. (2000) Three‐dimensional magnetotelluric inversion using non‐linear conjugate gradients. Geophysical Journal International, 140(2), 410–424.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Rochlitz, R., Becken, M. & Günther, T. (2023) Three‐dimensional inversion of semi‐airborne electromagnetic data with a second‐order finite‐element forward solver. Geophysical Journal International, 234, 528–545.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Rulff, P. (2023) Three‐dimensional forward modelling and inversion of controlled‐source electromagnetic data using the edge‐based finite‐element method. Ph.D. thesis, Uppsala University.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Rulff, P., Buntin, L.M. & Kalscheuer, T. (2021) Efficient goal‐oriented mesh refinement in 3‐D finite‐element modelling adapted for controlled source electromagnetic surveys. Geophysical Journal International, 227(3), 1624–1645.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Rulff, P., Kalscheuer, T., Bastani, M. & Zbinden, D. (2023) Three‐dimensional controlled‐source electromagnetic inversion of transfer function data. Geophysical Prospecting. Under review.
21. Sasaki, Y., Yi, M.J., Choi, J. & Son, J.S. (2015) Frequency and time domain three‐dimensional inversion of electromagnetic data for a grounded‐wire source. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 112, 106–114.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Smirnova, M., Shlykov, A., Asghari, S.F., Tezkan, B., Saraev, A., Yogeshwar, P. & Smirnov, M. (2023) 3D controlled‐source electromagnetic inversion in the radio‐frequency band. Geophysics, 88(1), E1–E12.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Védrine, S., Bretaudeau, F., Darnet, M., Hautot, S. & Tarits, P. (2023) Exploring geothermal resources using EM methods in coastal areas of volcanic islands: challenges of nearshore and land 3D CSEM. Geophysics, 88(5), 1–94.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Werthmüller, D., Mulder, W.A. & Slob, E.C. (2019) emg3d: A multigrid solver for 3d electromagnetic diffusion. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(39), 1463.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Zbinden, D. (2015) Inversion of 2D magnetotelluric and radiomagnetotelluric data with non‐linear conjugate gradient techniques. Master's thesis, Uppsala University.
26. Zonge, K.L. & Hughes, L.J. (1991) Controlled source audio‐frequency magnetetotellurics. In Electromagnetic methods in applied geophysics: Volume 2, Application, Parts A and B. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 713–810.
    [Google Scholar]