On the reliability of the AMS ellipsoid by statistical methods

被引:3
作者
Guerrero-Suarez, S. [1 ]
Martin-Hernandez, F.
机构
[1] Univ Complutense Madrid, Dept Fis Tierra Astron & Astrofis 1, E-28040 Madrid, Spain
关键词
Anisotropy of Magnetic Susceptibility; Bootstrap; Linear Perturbation Analysis; Rock magnetism; MAGNETIC-SUSCEPTIBILITY; ANISOTROPY; BOOTSTRAP; TENSORS;
D O I
10.1016/j.tecto.2014.04.010
中图分类号
P3 [地球物理学]; P59 [地球化学];
学科分类号
0708 ; 070902 ;
摘要
Weak magnetic materials whose susceptibility values are close to the instrument's accuracy show very large errors in the direct evaluation of their ellipsoid parameters. This may lead to misinterpretation of the magnetic fabric, which is often used as a geological indicator. In order to estimate the measurement uncertainties, several statistical methods have been proposed. Within the available statistical methods, the Linear Perturbation Analysis (Hext, 1963) and the non-parametric bootstrap (Constable and Tauxe, 1990) technique have been widely used. In this paper, we make a complete study about these methods to estimate their limitations when applied to n measurements of a single sample. We will analyze which method is better in terms of uncertainties, we will determine when the methods do not provide reliable results and we will establish a measuring protocol. For that, we run simulations for the Linear Perturbation Analysis and the non-parametric bootstrap varying i) the number of measurements, ii) the instrumental error and iii) the shape parameter and the anisotropy degree of the AMS ellipsoid. The results show that both methods are not reliable when the difference between eigenvalues is too close in relation to the instrumental error, but increasing the number of measurements can improve the results. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:75 / 86
页数:12
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1997, CAMBRIDGE SERIES STA
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1993, SPRINGER SCI BUSINES
  • [3] A method for improving the measurement of low-field magnetic susceptibility anisotropy in weak samples
    Biedermann, Andrea R.
    Lowrie, William
    Hirt, Ann M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED GEOPHYSICS, 2013, 88 : 122 - 130
  • [4] Borradaile G., 2003, STAT EARTH SCI DATA
  • [5] ANISOTROPY OF MAGNETIC-SUSCEPTIBILITY - MEASUREMENT SCHEMES
    BORRADAILE, GJ
    STUPAVSKY, M
    [J]. GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 1995, 22 (15) : 1957 - 1960
  • [6] Tectonic applications of magnetic susceptibility and its anisotropy
    Borradaile, GJ
    Henry, B
    [J]. EARTH-SCIENCE REVIEWS, 1997, 42 (1-2) : 49 - 93
  • [7] Induced magnetization of magnetite-titanomagnetite in alternating fields ranging from 400 A/m to 80,000 A/m; Low-field susceptibility (100-400 A/m) and beyond
    Borradaile, Graham J.
    Stupavsky, Mike
    Metsaranta, Dawn-Ann
    [J]. PURE AND APPLIED GEOPHYSICS, 2008, 165 (07) : 1411 - 1433
  • [8] Structural geology, petrofabrics and magnetic fabrics (AMS, AARM, AIRM)
    Borradaile, Graham J.
    Jackson, Mike
    [J]. JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY, 2010, 32 (10) : 1519 - 1551
  • [9] MAGNETIC FABRIC AND FLOW DIRECTION IN BASALTIC PAHOEHOE LAVA OF XITLE VOLCANO, MEXICO
    CANONTAPIA, E
    WALKER, GPL
    HERREROBERVERA, E
    [J]. JOURNAL OF VOLCANOLOGY AND GEOTHERMAL RESEARCH, 1995, 65 (3-4) : 249 - 263
  • [10] THE BOOTSTRAP FOR MAGNETIC-SUSCEPTIBILITY TENSORS
    CONSTABLE, C
    TAUXE, L
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SOLID EARTH AND PLANETS, 1990, 95 (B6): : 8383 - 8395