Deconvolução de Euler: passado, presente e futuro - um tutorial

In this tutorial we present a historical overview of the evolution of Euler deconvolution method consisting of three sections. In the first section, we recall the Euler deconvolution 2D and 3D classic formulation as a method to automatically locate sources of potential fields anomalies and point out the difficulties of this formulation: the presence of an undesirable spray of solutions, the empiric criteria used to determine the structural index (a parameter related with the source nature), the feasibility of applying Euler deconvolution to small ground data survey, and the determination of the dip and susceptibility contrast of geological contact (or the product of the susceptibility contrast and the thickness when applied to thin dike). In the second section, we present recent improvements aiming at minimizing some of the difficulties presented in the first section. They include: i) selecting the solutions essentially associated with observations presenting the largest signal-to-noise ratios; ii) using the correlation between the estimated anomaly baselevel and the observed anomaly itself or combining Euler deconvolution with the analytic signal to determine the structural index; iii) combining the results from (i) and (ii) to allow estimating the structural index independently of the number of solutions so that a small number of observations (such as in a ground survey) may be used; and iv) introducing additional equations, which are independent from Euler's equation to estimate the dip and susceptibility of 2D sources. In the third section we provide a short- to medium-term outlook into future developments. The main prospects are: i) furthering the improvements on the problems singled out in the second section; ii) developing methods to take vertical and lateral interferences into accounts; and iii) incorporating Euler deconvolution to constrain the source location estimates and use them in inversion methods to obtain a source delineation in a user-friendly computer environment.

[1]  V. Lesur,et al.  Grid Euler deconvolution with constraints for 2D structures , 2004 .

[2]  Ahmed Salem,et al.  A combined analytic signal and Euler method (AN-EUL) for automatic interpretation of magnetic data , 2003 .

[3]  João B. C. Silva,et al.  3D Euler deconvolution: Theoretical basis for automatically selecting good solutions , 2003 .

[4]  Armand Galdeano,et al.  Application of artificial intelligence for Euler solutions clustering , 2003 .

[5]  R. O. Hansen,et al.  Multiple-source Euler deconvolution , 2002 .

[6]  R. O. Hansen,et al.  Unification of Euler and Werner deconvolution in three dimensions via the generalized Hilbert transform , 2001 .

[7]  João B. C. Silva,et al.  Scattering, symmetry, and bias analysis of source-position estimates in Euler deconvolution and its practical implications , 2001 .

[8]  James Derek Fairhead,et al.  Magnetic source parameters of two-dimensional structures using extended Euler deconvolution , 2001 .

[9]  J. Derek Fairhead,et al.  Euler deconvolution of gravity tensor gradient data , 2000 .

[10]  João B. C. Silva,et al.  Making Euler deconvolution applicable to small ground magnetic surveys , 2000 .

[11]  Valéria C. F. Barbosa,et al.  Stability analysis and improvement of structural index estimation in Euler deconvolution , 1999 .

[12]  N. Cassidy,et al.  Euler deconvolution methods used to determine the depth to archaeological features , 1999, Geological Society, London, Special Publications.

[13]  Nicole Debeglia,et al.  Automatic 3-D interpretation of potential field data using analytic signal derivatives , 1997 .

[14]  P. Keating Weighted Euler deconvolution of gravity data , 1998 .

[15]  D. Ravat Analysis of the Euler Method and Its Applicability in Environmental Magnetic Investigations , 1996 .

[16]  A. Reid,et al.  Euler Deconvolution: Past, Present, And Future-A Review , 1995 .

[17]  J. Fairhead,et al.  Euler: Beyond the “Black Box” , 1994 .

[18]  M. Pilkington,et al.  Major circular structure beneath southern Lake Huron defined from potential field data , 1990 .

[19]  I. W. Somerton,et al.  Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution , 1990 .

[20]  D. T. Thompson,et al.  EULDPH: A new technique for making computer-assisted depth estimates from magnetic data , 1982 .

[21]  Misac N. Nabighian,et al.  The analytic signal of two-dimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal cross-section; its properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation , 1972 .

[22]  H. Naudy AUTOMATIC DETERMINATION OF DEPTH ON AEROMAGNETIC PROFILES , 1971 .

[23]  D. Teskey,et al.  A system for rapid digital aeromagnetic interpretation , 1970 .