English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A conventional magnetotelluric (MT) survey layout implies measurements of horizontal electric and magnetic fields at every site with subsequent estimation and interpretation of impedance tensors \({Z}\) or dependent responses, such as apparent resistivities and phases. In this work, we assess advantages and disadvantages of complementing or substituting conventional MT with inter-site transfer functions such as inter-site impedance tensor, \({Q}\), horizontal magnetic, \({M}\), and horizontal electric, \({T}\), tensors. Our analysis is based on a 3-D inversion of synthetic responses calculated for a 3-D model which consists of two buried adjacent (resistive and conductive) blocks and thin resistor above them.The (regularized) 3-D inversion is performed using scalable 3-D MT inverse solver with forward modelling engine based on a contracting integral equation approach. The inversion exploits gradient-type (quasi-Newton) optimization algorithm and invokes adjoint sources approach to compute misfits’ gradients. From our model study, we conclude that: (1) 3-D inversion of either \({Z}\) or \({Q}\) tensors recovers the “true” structures equally well. This, in particular, raises the question whether we need magnetic field measurements at every survey site in the course of 3-D MT studies; (2) recovery of true structures is slightly worse if \({T}\) tensor is inverted, and significantly worse if \({M}\) tensor is inverted; (3) simultaneous inversion of \({Z}\) and \({M}\) (or \({Z}\) and \({T}\)) does not improve the recovery of true structures compared to individual inversion of \({Z}\) or \({Q}\); (4) location of reference site, which is required for calculating inter-site \({Q}\), \({T}\) and \({M}\) tensors, has also marginal effect on the inversion results.

3-D inversion of MT impedances and inter-site tensors, individually and jointly. New lessons learnt