oa Three‐dimensional electromagnetic inversion of transfer function data from controlled sources

References

1. Abubakar, A., Habashy, T.M., Li, M. & Liu, J. (2009) Inversion algorithms for large‐scale geophysical electromagnetic measurements. Inverse Problems, 25(12), 123012.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Amaya, M. (2015) High‐order optimization methods for large‐scale 3D CSEM data inversion. PhD thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
3. Amestoy, P., Brossier, R., Buttari, A., L'Excellent, J.‐Y., Mary, T., Métivier, L., Miniussi, A. & Operto, S. (2016) Fast 3D frequency‐domain full‐waveform inversion with a parallel block low‐rank multifrontal direct solver: application to OBC data from the North Sea. Geophysics, 81(6), R363–R383.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Avdeev, D. & Avdeeva, A. (2009) 3D magnetotelluric inversion using a limited‐memory quasi‐Newton optimization. Geophysics, 74(3), F45–F57.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bastani, M. (2001) EnviroMT ‐ A new controlled source/radio magnetotelluric system. PhD thesis, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
6. Bastani, M., Johansson, H., Paulusson, A., Paulusson, K. & Dynesius, L. (2020) Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and ground‐based electromagnetic (EM) systems. First Break, 38(8), 87–89.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bastani, M., Persson, L., Mehta, S. & Malehmir, A. (2015) Boat‐towed radio‐magnetotellurics ‐ a new technique and case study from the city of Stockholm. Geophysics, 80(6), B193–B202.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bastani, M., Sadeghi, M. & Malehmir, A. (2019) 3D magnetic susceptibility model of a deep iron‐oxide apatite‐bearing orebody incorporating borehole data in Blötberget. Paper presented at the 16th SAGA Biennial Conference & Exhibition 2019.
9. Bastani, M., Wang, S., Malehmir, A. & Mehta, S. (2022) Radio‐magnetotelluric and controlled‐source magnetotelluric surveys on a frozen lake: Opportunities for urban applications in Nordic countries. Near Surface Geophysics, 20(1), 30–45.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Bretaudeau, F. & Coppo, N. (2016) A pseudo‐MT formulation for 3D CSEM inversion with a single transmitter. Paper presented at the Electromagnetic Induction Workshop, August 2016 (EMIW2016), Chiang Mai, Thailand.
11. Cai, H., Long, Z., Lin, W., Li, J., Lin, P. & Hu, X. (2021) 3D multinary inversion of controlled‐source electromagnetic data based on the finite‐element method with unstructured mesh. Geophysics, 86(1), E77–E92.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Cao, M., Tan, H.D. & Wang, K.P. (2016) 3D LBFGS inversion of controlled source extremely low frequency electromagnetic data. Applied Geophysics, 13(4), 689–700.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Castillo‐Reyes, O., Queralt, P., Marcuello, A. & Ledo, J. (2021) Land CSEM simulations and experimental test using metallic casing in a geothermal exploration context: Vallés basin (NE Spain) case study. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 60, 1–13.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Commer, M. & Newman, G.A. (2008) New advances in three‐dimensional controlled‐source electromagnetic inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 172(2), 513–535.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Fletcher, R. & Reeves, C.M. (1964) Function minimization by conjugate gradients. The Computer Journal, 7(2), 149–154.
    [Google Scholar]
16. 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]
17. Grayver, A.V., Streich, R. & Ritter, O. (2014) 3D inversion and resolution analysis of land‐based CSEM data from the Ketzin CO2$\rm CO_2$ storage formation. Geophysics, 79(2), E101–E114.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Gribenko, A. & Zhdanov, M. (2007) Rigorous 3D inversion of marine CSEM data based on the integral equation method. Geophysics, 72(2), WA73–WA84.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Günther, T., Rücker, C. & Spitzer, K. (2006) Three‐dimensional modelling and inversion of dc resistivity data incorporating topography ‐ II. Inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 166(2), 506–517.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Haber, E., Ascher, U.M. & Oldenburg, D.W. (2004) Inversion of 3D electromagnetic data in frequency and time domain using an inexact all‐at‐once approach. Geophysics, 69(5), 1216–1228.
    [Google Scholar]
21. 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(June), 1–19.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Hördt, A. & Scholl, C. (2004) The effect of local distortions on time‐domain electromagnetic measurements. Geophysics, 69(1), 87–96.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Hunkeler, P.A., Hendricks, S., Hoppmann, M., Farquharson, C.G., Kalscheuer, T., Grab, M., Kaufmann, M.S., Rabenstein, L. & Gerdes, R. (2016) Improved 1D inversions for sea ice thickness and conductivity from electromagnetic induction data: inclusion of nonlinearities caused by passive bucking. Geophysics, 81(1), WA45–WA58.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Hunkeler, P.A., Hoppmann, M., Hendricks, S., Kalscheuer, T. & Gerdes, R. (2016) A glimpse beneath Antarctic sea ice: platelet layer volume from multifrequency electromagnetic induction sounding. Geophysical Research Letters, 43(1), 222–231.
    [Google Scholar]
25. 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]
26. 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]
27. 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]
28. Kalscheuer, T., Juhojuntti, N. & Vaittinen, K. (2018) Two‐dimensional magnetotelluric modelling of ore deposits: improvements in model constraints by inclusion of borehole measurements. Surveys in Geophysics, 39(3), 467–507.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Kalscheuer, T. & Pedersen, L.B. (2007) A non‐linear truncated SVD variance and resolution analysis of two‐dimensional magnetotelluric models. Geophysical Journal International, 169(2), 435–447.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Kalscheuer, T., Pedersen, L.B. & Siripunvaraporn, W. (2008) Radiomagnetotelluric two‐dimensional forward and inverse modelling accounting for displacement currents. Geophysical Journal International, 175(2), 486–514.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Kamm, J., Lundin, I.A., Bastani, M., Sadeghi, M. & Pedersen, L.B. (2015) Joint inversion of gravity, magnetic, and petrophysical data ‐ A case study from a gabbro intrusion in Boden, Sweden. Geophysics, 80(5), B131–B152.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Kara, K.B. & Farquharson, C.G. (2023) 3D minimum‐structure inversion of controlled‐source EM data using unstructured grids. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 209, 104897.
    [Google Scholar]
33. 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]
34. 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]
35. Kim, H.J. & Kim, Y. (2011) A unified transformation function for lower and upper bounding constraints on model parameters in electrical and electromagnetic inversion. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 8(1), 21–26.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Li, X. & Pedersen, L.B. (1991) Controlled source tensor magnetotellurics. Geophysics, 56(9), 1456–1461.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Li, Y. & Oldenburg, D.W. (1996) 3‐D inversion of magnetic data. Geophysics, 61(2), 394–408.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Long, Z., Cai, H., Hu, X., Li, G. & Shao, O. (2020) Parallelized 3‐D CSEM Inversion with Secondary Field Formulation and Hexahedral Mesh. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 58(10), 6812–6822.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Mackie, R., Watts, M. & Rodi, W. (2007) Joint 3D inversion of marine CSEM and MT data. In SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2007. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 574–578.
40. Malehmir, A., Maries, G., Bäckström, E., Schön, M. & Marsden, P. (2017) Developing cost‐effective seismic mineral exploration methods using a landstreamer and a drophammer. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 1–7.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Maries, G., Malehmir, A., Bäckström, E., Schön, M. & Marsden, P. (2017) Downhole physical property logging for iron‐oxide exploration, rock quality, and mining: an example from central Sweden. Ore Geology Reviews, 90(October), 1–13.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Markovic, M., Maries, G., Malehmir, A., von Ketelhodt, J., Bäckström, E., Schön, M. & Marsden, P. (2020) Deep reflection seismic imaging of iron‐oxide deposits in the Ludvika mining area of central Sweden. Geophysical Prospecting, 68(1), 7–23.
    [Google Scholar]
43. McGillivray, P.R. & Oldenburg, D.W. (1990) Methods for calculating Fréchet derivatives and sensitivities for the non‐linear inverse problem: a comparative study. Geophysical Prospecting, 38(5), 499–524.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Mehta, S., Bastani, M., Malehmir, A. & Pedersen, L.B. (2017) Resolution and sensitivity of boat‐towed RMT data to delineate fracture zones ‐ example of the Stockholm bypass multi‐lane tunnel. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 139, 131–143.
    [Google Scholar]
45. 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]
46. Newman, G.A. & Boggs, P.T. (2004) Solution accelerators for large‐scale three‐dimensional electromagnetic inverse problems. Inverse Problems, 20(6), S151–S170.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Newman, G.A. & Commer, M. (2008) New advances in three‐dimensional controlled‐source electromagnetic inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 172(2), 513–535.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Nocedal, J. & Wright, S. (2006) Numerical optimization, second edition. Berlin: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Pedersen, L.B. (1982) The magnetotelluric impedance tensor ‐ its random and bias errors. Geophysical Prospecting, 30(2), 188–210.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Pedersen, L.B., Bastani, M. & Dynesius, L. (2005) Groundwater exploration using combined controlled‐source and radiomagnetotelluric techniques. Geophysics, 70(1), 8–15.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Pedersen, L.B. & Engels, M. (2005) Routine 2D inversion of magnetotelluric data using the determinant of the impedance tensor. Geophysics, 70(2), G33–G41.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Plessix, R.E. & Mulder, W.A. (2008) Resistivity imaging with controlled‐source electromagnetic data: depth and data weighting. IOP Science Inverse Problems, 24(3), 034012.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Polak, E. & Ribiere, G. (1969) Note sur la convergence de méthodes de directions conjuguées. Revue française d'informatique et de recherche opérationnelle. Série rouge, 3(R1), 35–43.
    [Google Scholar]
54. 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(1), 528–545.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Rücker, C. (2011) Advanced electrical resistivity modelling and inversion using unstructured discretization. PhD thesis, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
56. Rulff, P. (2023) Three‐dimensional forward modelling and inversion of controlled‐source electromagnetic data using the edge‐based finite‐element method. PhD thesis, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
57. 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]
58. Rulff, P. & Kalscheuer, T. (2024) A comparison between normalised controlled‐source electromagnetic field components and transfer functions as input data for three‐dimensional non‐linear conjugate gradient inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 72(5), 2005–2012.
    [Google Scholar]
59. 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]
60. Schaller, A., Streich, R., Drijkoningen, G., Ritter, O. & Slob, E. (2018) A land‐based controlled‐source electromagnetic method for oil field exploration: an example from the Schoonebeek oil field. Geophysics, 83(2), WB1–WB17.
    [Google Scholar]
61. SGU (2023) SGUs kartvisare. Accessed: 2023‐09‐30. https://apps.sgu.se/kartvisare/kartvisare‐berggrund‐1‐miljon.html.
62. Shewchuk, J.R. (1994) An introduction to the conjugate gradient method without the agonizing pain. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University, USA.
63. Si, H. (2015) TetGen, a delaunay‐based quality tetrahedral mesh generator. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 41(2), 1–36.
    [Google Scholar]
64. 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]
65. Soyer, W. & Brasse, H. (2001) A magneto‐variation array study in the central Andes of N Chile and SW Bolivia. Geophysical Research Letters, 28(15), 3023–3026.
    [Google Scholar]
66. Streich, R. (2016) Controlled‐source electromagnetic approaches for hydrocarbon exploration and monitoring on land. Surveys in Geophysics, 37(1), 47–80.
    [Google Scholar]
67. Tietze, K., Ritter, O., Patzer, C., Veeken, P. & Dillen, M. (2019) Repeatability of land‐based controlled‐source electromagnetic measurements in industrialized areas and including vertical electric fields. Geophysical Journal International, 218(3), 1552–1571.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Tikhonov, A.N. & Arsenin, V.I.V.I. (1977) Solutions of ill‐posed problems. Scripta series in mathematics. Washington: Winston.
    [Google Scholar]
69. Wang, S., Kalscheuer, T., Bastani, M., Malehmir, A., Pedersen, L.B., Dahlin, T. & Meqbel, N. (2018) Joint inversion of lake‐floor electrical resistivity tomography and boat‐towed radio‐magnetotelluric data illustrated on synthetic data and an application from the Äspö Hard Rock Laboratory site, Sweden. Geophysical Journal International, 213(1), 511–533.
    [Google Scholar]
70. Yan, P., Garcia Juanatey, M., Kalscheuer, T., Juhlin, C., Hedin, P., Savvaidis, A., Lorenz, H. & Kück, J. (2017) A magnetotelluric investigation of the Scandinavian Caledonides in western Jämtland, Sweden, using the COSC borehole logs as prior information. Geophysical Journal International, 208(3), 1465–1489.
    [Google Scholar]
71. Yan, P., Kalscheuer, T., Hedin, P. & Garcia Juanatey, M. (2017) Two‐dimensional magnetotelluric inversion using reflection seismic data as constraints and application in the COSC project. Geophysical Research Letters, 44(8), 3554–3563.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Zbinden, D. (2015) Inversion of 2D magnetotelluric and radiomagnetotelluric data with non‐linear conjugate gradient techniques. Master's thesis, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
73. Zhang, Y. (2015) Parallel goal‐oriented adaptive finite element modeling for 3D electromagnetic exploration. PhD thesis, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA.
74. Zonge, K.L. & Hughes, L.J. (1991) Controlled source audio‐frequency magnetotellurics. In Electromagnetic methods in applied geophysics: Volume 2, Application, Parts A and B. Tulsa, OK: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 713‐810.