2018
DOI: 10.4401/ag-7799
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Magnetic modelling and error assessment in archaeological geophysics: The case study of Urbs Salvia, central Italy

Abstract: We perform an analysis of the errors that affect magnetic anomaly data in archaeological geophysics, arising from both survey time pro− cedures and common potential fields methods of magnetic data processing. Specifically, there are errors due to: 1. positioning of total field readings, 2. the estimated diurnal drift of the Earth's magnetic field, 3. the selected gridding algorithm, 4. the process of reduction of total field data to magnetic anomalies, 5. the application of decorrugation filters, and 6. knitti… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This conversion is accomplished through a computer-assisted forward modelling procedure, constrained by the analysis of GPR and electric resistivity tomography (ERT) profiles. In fact, the construction of a magnetization model starting from the observed magnetic anomalies is affected by ambiguity (i.e., non-uniqueness of the magnetization distribution), due both to intrinsic characteristics of potential field geophysics and to the presence of uncertainty in the total field observations [26,27]. In our approach, the independent observation of archaeological features on GPR and ERT profiles allows for constraining the magnetization model and eliminating alternative solutions that would generate equivalent anomalies.…”
Section: Integration Of Geophysical Datasetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This conversion is accomplished through a computer-assisted forward modelling procedure, constrained by the analysis of GPR and electric resistivity tomography (ERT) profiles. In fact, the construction of a magnetization model starting from the observed magnetic anomalies is affected by ambiguity (i.e., non-uniqueness of the magnetization distribution), due both to intrinsic characteristics of potential field geophysics and to the presence of uncertainty in the total field observations [26,27]. In our approach, the independent observation of archaeological features on GPR and ERT profiles allows for constraining the magnetization model and eliminating alternative solutions that would generate equivalent anomalies.…”
Section: Integration Of Geophysical Datasetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The uncertainty ε associated with the magnetic anomaly map of Figure 12a is shown in Figure 12b. It was obtained by the following expression [19,20]:…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where ⏐∇T⏐ is the analytic signal of the observed total field intensities, εP is the maximum estimated positioning error, and ε0 is the background uncertainty associated with the statistical regression of the observed total field intensities to a polynomial surface [19]. We also generated the radially averaged power spectrum [21] of the magnetic anomaly grid, with the primary objective of checking that the ensemble with the highest slope had a depth compatible with the maximum expected depths of the archaeological features [19,20,21]. However, this kind of analysis also provides a quantitative estimate of the average depths associated with the statistical ensembles that constitute the magnetic sources, which will be used in the subsequent procedure of forward modelling.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Some stud− ies have analysed magnetic field measurements with different time resolutions, from milliseconds to hours, to locate the position of polar cusp [Marzocchetti et al, 2019], to reconstruct the plasmaspheric cold plasma density distribution [Del Corpo et al, 2019], to an− alyze the effects on the ground generated by the geomagnetically induced currents during the occurrence of geomagnetic storms , to study the scaling properties of the geomagnetic field's spatial fluctuations at both high latitudes (in the Northern and Southern Hemisphere) and low and mid latitudes , but also to investigate, along with electric field measure− ments, the anomalous electromagnetic signals generated in response to the propagation of a mechanical perturbation within the subsoil [Romano et al, 2019]. Magnetic measurements are also used by Ghezzi et al [2019] to perform an analysis of the errors that affect mag− netic anomaly data as regards the archaeological geophysics. Other studies are instead based on ionospheric measurements to investi− gate how the F2−layer critical frequency varied over Rome during the last three solar minima [Ippolito, 2019], to study both the dynamical properties of the electron density and the scaling properties of the electron density fluctuations at high latitudes in response to changes in the geomagnetic activity , and to carry out an interhemispheric comparison between high−latitude ionos− pheric observations in response to peculiar solar wind conditions .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%