2002
DOI: 10.1190/1.1527074
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Joint inversion of EM and magnetic data for near‐surface studies

Abstract: Magnetic and electromagnetic measurements are influenced by magnetic susceptibility and, thus, are widely used in geophysical surveys for archeology or pedology. To date, the data inversion is performed separately. A filtering process incorporating both types of data is presented here. After testing the algorithm with synthetic data, the algorithm is used in several case studies in archeological prospecting. This approach presents two advantages: establishing the presence of remanent magnetizations (viscous or… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the present example the direct comparison of raw data is significant although the difference in anomaly location could be corrected by proper processing such as reduction-to-the pole (e.g. Tassis et al, 2008) or by transforming the EMI data (Benech et al, 2002). On the other hand, the gradiometer map was clearly sharper than the EM38DD maps; the anomaly borders were more abrupt.…”
Section: Comparison Between Em38dd Configurations and Gradiometer (Sumentioning
confidence: 85%
“…In the present example the direct comparison of raw data is significant although the difference in anomaly location could be corrected by proper processing such as reduction-to-the pole (e.g. Tassis et al, 2008) or by transforming the EMI data (Benech et al, 2002). On the other hand, the gradiometer map was clearly sharper than the EM38DD maps; the anomaly borders were more abrupt.…”
Section: Comparison Between Em38dd Configurations and Gradiometer (Sumentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Previously, workers had inferred such a connection only for magnetic sources that are discrete, buried objects ͑e.g., Tabbagh, 1984Tabbagh, , 1986Tabbagh et al, 1988;Benech et al, 2002͒. Integrating the EM31 apparent-conductivity data ͑Figure 5c͒ with the ERT profiles ͑Figure 4͒ revealed that the sources of the conductivity anomalies around line S65 are mainly shallow. Excavation later revealed that the areas of high resistivity are caused by the presence of materials deposited by anthropogenic activity, such as charcoal and gravel, in particular, with some pockets of slag and disintegrated brick.…”
Section: Upper Plateaumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This technique may also be used in magnetic susceptibility studies. It has a high potential: either in light weight systems easy to use in difficult field conditions or coupled with magnetic prospecting (Benech et al, 2002;Pétronille et al, 2010;Simpson et al, 2009b).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%