Geological Uncertainty and Geophysical Ambiguity: Friends or Foes?

@inproceedings{ailleres:hal-04066177,
 abstract = {We present two case studies of sensitivity analysis of 2.5D forward and 3D inverse potential field modelling at the scale of a volcano and of a tectonic belt. The results show that geophysical ambiguity and geological uncertainty can be used to reduce each other and knowledge can be derived from the residual field (differences between observed and calculated fields) utilising the variability allowed by potential field ambiguity. Recent research on geological uncertainty shows that a better sampling of the geological model space is possible. Although still a manual procedure, sampling the geophysical model space is also possible. The combination of both allows for building a more consistent suite of 3D geological models that are consistent with both the geological input data and the geophysical response of the terrane modelled.},
 address = {Nancy, France},
 author = {Ailleres, Laurent and Armit, Robin and Blaike, Teagan and Carmichael, Thomas and Grose, Lachlan and Laurent, Gautier and Betts, Peter and Jessell, Mark and Lindsay, Mark},
 booktitle = {{13th Biennal SGA meeting}},
 hal_id = {hal-04066177},
 hal_version = {v1},
 organization = {{SGA}},
 pages = {1693-1696},
 title = {{Geological Uncertainty and Geophysical Ambiguity: Friends or Foes?}},
 url = {https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-04066177},
 year = {2015}
}