2020
DOI: 10.1186/s40623-020-01173-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improved shift-invariant sparse coding for noise attenuation of magnetotelluric data

Abstract: Magnetotelluric (MT) method is widely used for revealing deep electrical structure. However, natural MT signals are susceptible to cultural noises. In particular, the existing data-processing methods usually fail to work when MT data are contaminated by persistent or coherent noises. To improve the quality of MT data collected with strong ambient noises, we propose a novel time-series editing method based on the improved shift-invariant sparse coding (ISISC), a data-driven machine learning algorithm. First, a … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, strong interference of MT data will cause the excessive distortion of the apparent resistivity-phase curve and excessive concentration of phase angle in polarization direction. The high quality data obtained after de-noising will provide technical support for the following inversion interpretation (Qi et al 2020;Li et al 2020a).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Thus, strong interference of MT data will cause the excessive distortion of the apparent resistivity-phase curve and excessive concentration of phase angle in polarization direction. The high quality data obtained after de-noising will provide technical support for the following inversion interpretation (Qi et al 2020;Li et al 2020a).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Existing time series processing techniques, such as the least-square method (Sims et al, 1971), remote reference method (Goubau et al, 1978;Gamble et al, 1979b;Gamble et al, 1979a), robust estimation method (Egbert and Booker, 1986;Chave et al, 1987;Larsen et al, 1996;Smirnov, 2003;Chave and Thomson, 2004), maximum likelihood estimation method (Chave, 2014;Chave, 2017), and others methods based on wavelet transform, 10.3389/feart.2023.1086749 Hilbert-Huang transform, variational mode decomposition, and interstation transfer function (Kappler, 2012;Cai, 2014;Campanya et al, 2014;Cai and Chen, 2015;Carbonari et al, 2017;Wang et al, 2017), have different processing performance for different kinds of noise. For example, the least-square method performs poorly in the presence of outliers (Egbert and Booker, 1986), and the remote reference method does not work when noise is correlated at the local and remote sites (Shalivahan and Bhattacharya, 2002;Pomposiello et al, 2009), and the robust estimation method usually fails to work when MT data are contaminated by persistent or coherent noises (Escalas et al, 2013;Carbonari et al, 2017;Li et al, 2020a;Li et al, 2020c;Zhou et al, 2022;Zhang et al, 2022). New time series processing methods for various types of noise are the focus of current research, but there is a lack of criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of various MT time series processing methods in existing studies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, using modern data processing technology to remove the strong interference existing in measured MT signals has become an important research topic in the field of electromagnetic exploration, and the improvement of MT data quality in the strong interference area will provide strong technical support for the subsequent inversion interpretation (Ren et al ., 2013; Qi et al ., 2020). A wide variety of methods have been proposed for solving this problem, such as short‐time Fourier transform (Vozoff, 1972; Kao and Rankin, 1977; Griffin and Lim, 1984), remote reference (RR) method (Goubau et al ., 1978; Gamble et al ., 1979; Clarke et al ., 1983; Kappler, 2012), robust estimation (Egbert and Booker, 1986; Larsen, 1989; Chave and Thomson, 1989, 2004; Larsen et al ., 1996; Egbert, 1997), wavelet transform (Trad and Travassos, 2000; He et al ., 2009; Carbonari et al ., 2017), Hilbert–Huang transform (HHT) and empirical mode decomposition (EMD; Chen et al ., 2012; Cai, 2014; Chen and Fomel, 2018; Liu et al ., 2019), mathematical morphological filtering (MMF; Tang et al ., 2012b), inter‐station transfer functions (Wang et al ., 2017), Self‐organizing Map (SOM) neural networks (Carbonari et al ., 2018), multifractal spectrum and matching pursuit (MP; Li et al ., 2019), Mahalanobis distance and magnetic field constraints (Platz and Weckmann, 2019), shift‐invariant sparse coding (Li et al ., 2020) etc. These methods have certain advantages and promote the development of MT signal–noise separation research to a certain extent, but there are still some shortcomings.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%