A discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses

Magnetic-field noise biases magnitudes of magnetotelluric response functions such as resistivity, impedance, and the induction vector (tipper). This is particularly severe in the so-called dead band between about 1- and 10-s periods. The standard approach to remove these biases is to use a magnetic...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pomposiello, M.C., Booker, J.R., Favetto, A.
Formato: JOUR
Materias:
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_00168033_v74_n4_pF59_Pomposiello
Aporte de:
id todo:paper_00168033_v74_n4_pF59_Pomposiello
record_format dspace
spelling todo:paper_00168033_v74_n4_pF59_Pomposiello2023-10-03T14:14:54Z A discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses Pomposiello, M.C. Booker, J.R. Favetto, A. Electric fields Magnetic fields Magnetism Magnetotellurics Electric and magnetic fields Induction vectors Inversion algorithm Magnetic field noise Parallel component Remote sites Response functions Unbiased estimates Electric variables measurement algorithm correlation data inversion electromagnetic field estimation method magnetotelluric method measurement method Magnetic-field noise biases magnitudes of magnetotelluric response functions such as resistivity, impedance, and the induction vector (tipper). This is particularly severe in the so-called dead band between about 1- and 10-s periods. The standard approach to remove these biases is to use a magnetic remote reference. In cases where this is unavailable or does not work because noise is correlated at the local and remote sites, it is possible to extract unbiased estimates using an inversion algorithm that predicts the magnitude from the phase. However, an important condition for this to be successful is that phase estimates are unbiased. Phase can be biased if parallel components of the electric and magnetic fields are correlated. This arises when the structure is 3D or when a 2D response is estimated in coordinates not parallel to strike. Improvements in electric field measurements make electric field references a viable option for estimating low-bias responses up to periods approaching 1000 s. © 2009 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. All rights reserved. JOUR info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_00168033_v74_n4_pF59_Pomposiello
institution Universidad de Buenos Aires
institution_str I-28
repository_str R-134
collection Biblioteca Digital - Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales (UBA)
topic Electric fields
Magnetic fields
Magnetism
Magnetotellurics
Electric and magnetic fields
Induction vectors
Inversion algorithm
Magnetic field noise
Parallel component
Remote sites
Response functions
Unbiased estimates
Electric variables measurement
algorithm
correlation
data inversion
electromagnetic field
estimation method
magnetotelluric method
measurement method
spellingShingle Electric fields
Magnetic fields
Magnetism
Magnetotellurics
Electric and magnetic fields
Induction vectors
Inversion algorithm
Magnetic field noise
Parallel component
Remote sites
Response functions
Unbiased estimates
Electric variables measurement
algorithm
correlation
data inversion
electromagnetic field
estimation method
magnetotelluric method
measurement method
Pomposiello, M.C.
Booker, J.R.
Favetto, A.
A discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses
topic_facet Electric fields
Magnetic fields
Magnetism
Magnetotellurics
Electric and magnetic fields
Induction vectors
Inversion algorithm
Magnetic field noise
Parallel component
Remote sites
Response functions
Unbiased estimates
Electric variables measurement
algorithm
correlation
data inversion
electromagnetic field
estimation method
magnetotelluric method
measurement method
description Magnetic-field noise biases magnitudes of magnetotelluric response functions such as resistivity, impedance, and the induction vector (tipper). This is particularly severe in the so-called dead band between about 1- and 10-s periods. The standard approach to remove these biases is to use a magnetic remote reference. In cases where this is unavailable or does not work because noise is correlated at the local and remote sites, it is possible to extract unbiased estimates using an inversion algorithm that predicts the magnitude from the phase. However, an important condition for this to be successful is that phase estimates are unbiased. Phase can be biased if parallel components of the electric and magnetic fields are correlated. This arises when the structure is 3D or when a 2D response is estimated in coordinates not parallel to strike. Improvements in electric field measurements make electric field references a viable option for estimating low-bias responses up to periods approaching 1000 s. © 2009 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. All rights reserved.
format JOUR
author Pomposiello, M.C.
Booker, J.R.
Favetto, A.
author_facet Pomposiello, M.C.
Booker, J.R.
Favetto, A.
author_sort Pomposiello, M.C.
title A discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses
title_short A discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses
title_full A discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses
title_fullStr A discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses
title_full_unstemmed A discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses
title_sort discussion of bias in magnetotelluric responses
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_00168033_v74_n4_pF59_Pomposiello
work_keys_str_mv AT pomposiellomc adiscussionofbiasinmagnetotelluricresponses
AT bookerjr adiscussionofbiasinmagnetotelluricresponses
AT favettoa adiscussionofbiasinmagnetotelluricresponses
AT pomposiellomc discussionofbiasinmagnetotelluricresponses
AT bookerjr discussionofbiasinmagnetotelluricresponses
AT favettoa discussionofbiasinmagnetotelluricresponses
_version_ 1807318663229865984