1. Introduction
Magnetic techniques are mainly based on the measurement of the Earth’s magnetic field [1] over a given area and the associated geographical variations with changes in the magnetic susceptibility of the subsurface [2]. Electromagnetic methods (EM) [3] use natural or artificial, electric or magnetic sources to generate secondary signals due to the presence of conductivity/resistivity subsurface variations [4]. Both techniques, either ground, borehole, or airborne, are widely used in mineral exploration [1,5] either to directly detect mineralization or to characterize the geology surrounding a potential deposit. The last fifteen years were an active period for the development of these techniques. Years 2010–2012 saw a significant allocation for exploration budgets [6]. However, these years were followed by four years of decreasing exploration budgets that slowly recovered after 2017 without reaching their previous peak. Worldwide production reached a plateau around 2013 [7] and has been stable since. During the same period, technology improvements have had an profound impact on society [8,9], and in particular exploration geophysics.
Technological advances in the application and interpretation of these techniques have been numerous over the last fifteen years, since the seminal works of [1,5,10,11] covering the first decade of the XXIst century, and are difficult to relate succinctly. For this reason, we refer the reader to the reviews of [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20] which cover acquisition and interpretation. Thus, the focus of this paper is on case studies of magnetic and EM techniques, since they are an important part of the geophysical literature that reflects technological advances and their usage. We mainly rely on papers published in the last fifteen years in Geophysics, Exploration Geophysics, Geophysical Prospecting, Minerals, and Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists (ASEG) Extended Abstracts, as these publications can be easily found on the internet. For developers, these publications are opportunities to justify claimstaking while also celebrating success sometimes. Consequently, case studies published since 2010 highlight the achievements of the last fifteen years. First, we start with applications of aeromagnetic drone techniques, followed by publications of magnetic and EM techniques, classified by continent, knowing that our choice of publications may bias the geographical distribution of our results. Magnetic surveys are often conducted with gravity surveys and in this circumstance classified as potential field surveys.
2. Drones
During the period covered, various studies were conducted to compare unmanned airborne vehicle (UAV) measurements with ground or airborne measurements. Ref. [21] conducted a simulated magnetic UAV survey and compared the results with ground and airborne surveys. The results have higher resolution than airborne surveys and are similar to ground survey data. Ref. [22] compares the responses of UAV magnetic data with airborne data over a hilly area in China. The results compare favorably. Ref. [23] compares measurements collected with a rotary-wing UAV magnetometer and with fixed-wing aeromagnetic data over iron-oxide deposits in central Sweden. The two data sets outline the mineralization similarly. Ref. [24] conducted an UAV survey over mineralization in New Brunswick, Canada, whose results compare favorably with upward continued ground magnetic data. Ref. [25] compares the response of ground, helicopter and UAV magnetic data over a prospective gold area in northern Québec. UAV data are of the same quality as traditional methods. Ref. [26] conducts a combined ground and UAV magnetic survey in northern Sweden, where the ground and airborne surveys were compared. Strong correlation is observed between the two surveys. Ref. [27] describes trials of an UAV sub-audio magnetics (SAM) survey at Forrestania Electromagnetic Test Range in Western Australia.
Several drone case studies were conducted over known mineralizations. Ref. [28] presents the results of a magnetic UAV survey conducted in the Shebandowan Greenstone Belt, northwest of Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada. Ref. [29] describes a magnetic UAV survey over a gold property in northern Québec, Canada, and after repeatability tests for validating the data, these data were inverted with Geosoft VOXI toolbox. Ref. [30] presents a case study of helimagnetic survey for regional exploration and UAV for high-resolution exploration of iron ore located in Pocheon, Korea. Ref. [31] developed a new iterative imaging technique applied to UAV magnetic data for achieving high resolution and identifying weak anomalies to be applied over an iron deposit in China. Other UAV studies include a survey of the Bjerkreim–Sokndal layered intrusion in southwestern Norway with custom multirotor magnetic UAV, in an area with challenging environmental conditions [32]. The UAV added information about the important geological contacts and, with multiple flight altitudes, helped in the construction of the anomaly. Ref. [33] describes a combined ground–UAV TDEM survey carried out over a gold prospect in eastern Russia. Ref. [34] presents the results of an UAV magnetic gradiometry survey over a little iron ore deposit in western Iran.
3. Magnetics
3.1. Africa
Ref. [35] presents a potential field study of kimberlites in Botswana, where geometrical properties of two of the pipes were estimated using gravity and magnetic analysis, and modelling. Ref. [36] applies digital edge detector operations on magnetic data to enhance the delineation and interpretation of geological features within the Middle Benue Trough of northern Nigeria. Ref. [37] applies a joint inversion to combined gravity and magnetic datasets collected over kimberlite pipes, also in Botswana. Ref. [38] combines aeromagnetic data and geochemical analysis to map related gold ore mineralization deposits around the Wadi El-Saqia area in the Central Eastern Desert of Egypt. Ref. [39] presents magnetic data processing and interpretation for exploration of rutile from the Minta area, in Haute-Sanaga, Cameroon. Using magnetic data, Ref. [40] establishes connections between geological structures and precious and base metal deposits of the Pangar-Djérem Zone, Cameroon. Ref. [41] analyzes aeromagnetic data, transformations, and geological information for the structural interpretation of the location of precious stones from the mineral-rich zones in parts of Lafiagi and Pategi areas of Bida basin, central Nigeria. Ref. [42] integrates ground geophysical methods (ground magnetics, electrical resistivity, and induced polarization) in conjunction with fire assay and inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry techniques to delineate orogenic gold mineralization potential zones in the Kushaka greenschist belt, Nigeria. Using ground magnetic data, Ref. [43] characterizes anomalous bodies in the manganese-rich mining zone situated in Bouarfa, Morocco. Ref. [44] analyzes geological and geophysical data to assess the structural trends affecting phosphate distribution near Wadi El-Nakheel, Egypt. Ref. [45] presents an integrated geophysical investigation for potential gold mineralized zones located in northwestern Nigeria. Ref. [46] applies surface geometry inversion to a magnetic dataset acquired over two kimberlite pipes located in north-central Botswana. Ref. [47] describes ground and airborne geophysical data collected over a gold deposit located in Guinea.
3.2. Asia
Using gravity and magnetic data, Ref. [48] develops an integrated geological model for the polymetallic Shizishan ore field in Anhui Province of China. Ref. [49] presents an interpretation of aeromagnetic data collected over a north-east trending orogenic gold belt of the Piranshahr-Sardasht-Saqqez Zone, Iran. Ref. [50] presents the geophysical signatures of the Beldih mine in eastern India, known for Nb–rare-earth-element–uranium mineralization. Ref. [51] proposes a combination of magnetic data filters to locate porphyry copper deposits in the tertiary magmatic belts of Iran. Ref. [52] applies constrained inversion to the interpretation of the Macheng iron deposit in China. Ref. [53] presents the case of a large magnetic anomaly detected by airborne geophysics at Gadarwara Madhya Pradesh, in north-central India. Drilling shows that this anomaly, which can be fitted with 2D models, is caused by an iron formation. Ref. [54] applies factorial kriging to regional–residual separation of magnetic data collected over the Bashmaq area, an Iron Oxide Copper-Gold (IOCG) deposit, in northwestern Iran. Ref. [55] integrates aeromagnetic, radiometric, and satellite imagery data over the Chahargonbad area in the Kerman province of Iran, prone to Cu-bearing mineralization. Ref. [56] discusses aeromagnetic exploration methods applied to exploration of iron deposits located in the Hubei province of China. Ref. [57] applies a methodology to analyze and fuse information (Landsat, aeromagnetic data, geological data, and geochemical stream sediment analysis) over an area known for copper indices and mines in Iran. Ref. [58] presents a study of ground magnetic and electrical resistivity/chargeability data from Kerala, India, known for vein-type gold mineralization. Ref. [59] employs 3D magnetic susceptibility inversion of aeromagnetic data over lead-zinc polymetallic deposits in Yichun, China. Ref. [60] interprets magnetic anomalies of the Galinge iron polymetallic deposit in western China.
3.3. Australia
Ref. [61] presents the results of an aeromagnetic and radiometry survey over the Carrapateena iron-oxide copper-gold deposit located in South Australia. Ref. [62] describes various magnetic data collection and processing over the magnetite iron ore resource Hawsons Iron project in western New South Wales. Ref. [63] applies the method developed by [64] to analyze magnetic data over a gold-mineralized system in Queensland. Ref. [65] studies the anisotropy of the Monakoff carbonate-hosted IOCG in Queensland and surrounding banded iron formations to differentiate the structural and metallogenic controls. Ref. [66] compares magnetic responses from an iron-rich gossan in a volcanic environment and a limestone-hosted manganese deposit of Papua New Guinea. Ref. [67] applies geological constraints to the inversion of magnetic data over the Darlot-Centenary Gold Mine of Western Australia. Ref. [68] presents airborne magnetic inversions over the Wallaby gold deposit of Western Australia. Ref. [69] applies petrology and petrophysics to the interpretation of airborne magnetic surveys conducted over the Mt Leahy Tenement porphyry copper project in Papua New Guinea. Ref. [70] integrates drill core geochemistry, spectral and petrophysical logs, and geophysical data to characterize the Punt Hill Copper-Gold prospect and IOCG system of South Australia. Ref. [71] interprets magnetic, radiometric, and gravity data from the Stanthorpe region, Australia, with a particular interest on hydrothermal alteration. Ref. [72] presents interpretation of potential field data over the Darlot gold mine located in the Yilgarn Craton. Ref. [73] studies the region of Heazlewood-Luina-Waratah, a prospective region for minerals in northwestern Tasmania, Australia, by combining the results of potential field (geometry and property) inversion, petrophysical measurements, and updated field mapping. Ref. [74] presents an integration modelling and associated machine learning targeting of the Jaguar Massive Sulfide (MS) deposit of Western Australia using potential field and geological information.
3.4. Europe
Ref. [75] analyzes the results of magnetic and electric surveys completed to extend known Fe-rich emery horizons and to locate new deposits in the Elmacik area, Yatagan, Turkey. Ref. [76] develops and applies a joint inversion algorithm on 3D potential field data collected over a gabbro intrusion in northern Sweden. Ref. [77] investigates, using potential fields, Slingram moving loop data and rock’s physical properties the geological geometry in the Gällivare mining area, Sweden.
3.5. North America
Ref. [78] inverts magnetic and gravity data with geological and geophysical constraints over the Rambler Rhyolite in Newfoundland, Canada. Ref. [79] applies an automatic lineament network extraction method to identify magnetic lows that may represent faults from Wopmay Orogen in northwestern Canada, an area with promising polymetallic hydrothermal mineral occurrences. Ref. [80] derives constraints from a geophysical–geological feedback process and applies these constraints on inversion models for interpreting the northeast Amer belt located in Nunavut, Canada. Ref. [81] uses the normalized source strength for interpretation of potential field tensor data collected for exploration of nickel, copper and platinum group element (Ni-Cu-PGE) deposits in the McFaulds Lake area, northern Ontario, Canada. Ref. [82] analyzes aeromagnetic data to locate intrusives near the Pebble deposit in Alaska, USA. In Canada, the Sudbury structure in Ontario, which is host to several ore deposits, has the been the subject of various studies. Ref. [83] models airborne gravity and magnetic profiles, while constraining the results based on seismic sections, geological contacts, and petrophysical data of the Sudbury area. Ref. [84] predicts the 3D geological setting of the Sudbury structure by integrating available geophysical and geological information using 3D GeoModeller software. Ref. [85] builds a litho-prediction model from potential field data-constrained inversions over the Victoria property, in Sudbury. Ref. [86] analyzes potential field data covering the southwest Thelon Basin, Northwest Territories, Canada, a prospective area for uranium and other economic metals. Ref. [87] applies magnetization inversion at the regional scale and cooperative inversion of DC/IP and magnetics at the local scale over the Newton Au-Ag deposit in British Columbia, Canada. Ref. [88] compares unconstrained and constrained inversions applied on potential field data collected from three different mining sites in Canada. Constrained inversion provided more meaningful results in the three cases. Ref. [89] compares the results of three different inversions programs applied on the same dataset, Highland Valley copper district in British Columbia, Canada, with unconstrained and constrained models. Variations in the results are attributed to the intrinsic errors in producing images from different programs. Ref. [90] proposes, based on 3D magnetic data inversion, computation of an alteration index to estimate porphyry copper alteration at depth at Highland Valley. Ref. [91] presents a case study of potential field joint inversion collected over the McArthur River area of the eastern Athabasca Basin in western Canada. Airborne and ground gravity and magnetic data over one of the Tli Kwi Cho kimberlites in Northwest Territories, Canada, were interpreted with petrophysically and geologically-guided joint inversions by [92]. Ref. [93] images oxide-apatite deposits located in eastern Adirondack Highlands, upstate New York, USA, using aeromagnetic, aeroradiometric, ground gravity, petrophysical and geochemical data. Ref. [94] applies self-organizing maps (SOMs) to magnetic, radiometric and gravity data sets from the Baie Verte Peninsula, in Newfoundland, Canada. Ref. [95] incorporated 3D magnetic inversion in the structural study of Sixtymile Gold district, Yukon, Canada. Ref. [96] performs joint potential field inversion and geology differentiation to obtain a quasi-geological model of the Elk Creek Carbonatite complex, southeast Nebraska, USA, an area hosting niobium and rare earth element mineralization.
3.6. South America
Ref. [97] uses the SOM approach to analyze airborne geophysical data collected over the Brazilian Amazon. Ref. [98] analyzes aeromagnetic data collected over the Morro do Leme nickel deposit, Brazil, with an initial model based on magnetic source parameter estimation techniques. Ref. [99] presents a study characterizing geology from inverted potential field data over an iron formation in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Ref. [100] inverts magnetic data above the Furnas southeast IOCG deposit at a low magnetic latitude in Carajás Mineral Province, Brazil. Ref. [101] analyzes the geophysical data above the Catalão I alkaline–carbonatite complex, located in central Brazil, which is one of the main producers of niobium and phosphates in the world. Ref. [102] studies and delineates, through various geophysical parameters, the source of a magnetic anomaly near the Buracao da Velha copper deposit in Brazil. Ref. [103] develops an interpretation scheme based on geophysical models obtained from 2D and 3D inversion of geophysical and sparse geological data. This scheme was applied to the interpretation of geophysical data collected over the Cristalino iron oxide copper-gold deposit, in northern Brazil. Ref. [104] applies a new technique for airborne magnetic topography correction on data collected over the Río Blanco-Los Bronces and El Teniente porphyry copper districts (Andes of central Chile). Ref. [105] utilizes 3D litho-constrained inversion of potential field data to define a region with good potential for iron ore deposits in the Sierra Grande region of northern Patagonia, Argentina. Ref. [106] compares four techniques for removing spatial aliasing artifacts in aeromagnetic surveys completed over southeastern Minas Gerais, Brazil. Using the Poisson theorem relating magnetization and density, Ref. [107] interprets a pseudo potential field survey covering the Serra Sul of the Carajás Mineral Province, Brazil, area known for iron deposits. An analysis by [108] of the geophysical data collected at the Cristalino IOCG deposit in Carajás, Brazil, reveals that magnetic rocks are not fully mapped by the total magnetic gradient if the strike of the rocks direction and Earth’s magnetic field direction coincide. Furthermore, brecciated massive sulfides are found to be weakly magnetic. Ref. [109] presents results of 2D modelling and 3D inversion of airborne magnetic data flown over the Serra das Éguas Complex, (in Brumado, Bahia, northeastern Brazil), a geological structure containing lenses of magnesite. Ref. [110] uses gravity and magnetic methods for the investigation of an iron ore deposit, namely East Deposit, of Sierra Grande Formation, Río Negro Province, Argentina.
3.7. Mixed Continents
Ref. [111] reviews the practice of gravity, magnetic, and radiometric methods to the study of igneous intrusions, notably carbonatitic–alkalic intrusions, peralkaline intrusions, and pegmatites, rich in rare-earth metals, with North American and Australian examples.
4. Electromagnetics
4.1. Africa
Ref. [112] compares four different AEM system data sets from the Sunnyside nickel deposit in southeast Botswana. Ref. [113] presents filtered and enhanced Airborne Electromagnetic (AEM) time domain data acquired over the Ilesha Shist Belt in southwestern Nigeria. Ref. [114] presents a study, using ground geophysical methods, aimed at detecting sulfide mineralization possibly associated with radioactive bostonite rocks located in the Central Eastern Desert, Egypt.
4.2. Asia
Ref. [115] describes the results of high-resolution heliborne magnetic and time domain EM surveys conducted over a fracture-controlled uranium deposit located in the Sikar district, Rajasthan, India. Ref. [116] describes the results of a controlled source audio-frequency magnetotelluric (CSAMT) survey carried out to evaluate potential iron (Fe) and polymetallic (Pb-Zn-Cu) deposits in Longmen region, southern China. Ref. [117] attributes to polarizable conductive zones negative responses in heliborne EM data recorded over uranium deposits in the Cuddapah Basin, India. Ref. [118] evaluates a chromite exploration case history using CSAMT, located in southern Tibet, China. Ref. [119] compares broadside (perpendicular) and inline ground time domain EM methods over the Caosiyao porphyry molybdenum deposit in China. Ref. [120] presents 3D MT inversions in the central Luzong basin ore district of eastern China which is well known for porphyry iron deposits. Ref. [121] describes the results of an AMT survey conducted over a gold polymetallic deposit in the Qinling Metallogenic Belt of North China Craton. Ref. [122] 3D inverts AMT data over the Cimabanshuo porphyry copper deposit in Tibet. Ref. [123] analyzes the application of the AMT technique to a metallic deposit located in the northwestern Guizhou province of China.
4.3. Australia
Ref. [124] compares 3D inversions of AEM systems ZTEM and AirMT collected over the Nebo-Babel Ni-Cu-PGE deposit, in West Musgrave, Western Australia. Ref. [125] presents airborne EM results of surveys over known and new manganese deposits located in Western Australia. Ref. [126] presents results of airborne and borehole EM surveys at Hallandaire copper deposit in Western Australia. Ref. [127] integrates inverted AEM data with the initial model of a 2D MT inversion conducted over the Cariewerloo Basin, a region of unconformity-type uranium deposit, in South Australia. Ref. [128] presents and interprets sub-audio magnetics data over the Far South gold project located in Western Australia. Ref. [129] describes airborne and ground EM surveys which led to the discovery of the Musket and Camelwood nickel sulfide deposits located in Western Australia. Ref. [130] presents drill hole EM surveys that led to the discovery of the Eureka massive sulfide lens located in Victoria. Ref. [131] describes the discovery of the Artemis Cu-Au-Zn-Ag deposit, located in northwest Queensland, using historical geophysical and geological data complimented by new airborne and ground EM. Ref. [132] presents and discusses AEM results over banded iron formation in the Hamersley Province of Western Australia. Ref. [133] attributes second-order effects in concentric-loop AEM system responses at Lewis Ponds in New South Wales, Australia, to polarizable material mapped with a Cole–Cole model as ground dipole–dipole array data accurately imaged disseminated sulfides surrounding ore-grade massive sulfides. Ref. [134] compares AEM responses collected over the Nebo Babel Ni-Cu-PGE deposit located in Western Australia. Ref. [135] delineates cobalt targets using the sub-audio magnetics method deployed over cobalt high-grade mineralization of the Carlow Castle project of Western Australia. Ref. [136] compares three inversion methods applied to greenfield AEM data. CDI3D, Maxwell codes, and underdetermined 3D voxellated inversion were used over a volume surrounding the conductor at the test site in Forrestania, Western Australia. The first two methods provide satisfactory results in comparison with the third method, which computes using significant computer resources but without satisfactory results. Ref. [137] presents results of borehole EM surveys associated with the mineralization in the Bellevue Gold Mine in the Agnew-Wiluna greenstone belt. Ref. [138] presents observations and interpretations from an AEM survey conducted over Mississippi valley-type lead-zinc (MV Pb-Zn) sulfide occurrences of the Canning Basin. Ref. [139] presents AEM data collected over PGE-Ni-Cu sulfide zones of the Julimar Region of Western Australia. Ref. [140] presents the application of airborne passive EM for targeting hidden mineralization near the Telfer gold–copper deposit. Ref. [141] describes a discovery of nickel sulfide mineralization in the Yilgram region found by recovering AEM data’s weakly conductive features, originally masked by IP effects.
4.4. Europe
Ref. [142] describes seismic reflection and MT surveys carried out in northwestern Skellefte District, Sweden, with the objectives of explaining the geological relationship between the mineralizations in the Adak mining camp and the Kristineberg area. Ref. [143] describes ground electric and EM surveys conducted over the Pb-Zn deposit of Lontzen-Poppelsberg, Belgium. Ref. [144] describes audio 2D MT inversion results from data collected over the Outokumpu belt in eastern Finland, characterized by several polymetallic (Cu-Co-Zn-Ni-Ag-Au) sulfide ore deposits. Ref. [145] presents the results of ground-based long-offset transient-electromagnetic data in eastern Thuringia, Germany. Plate models derived for AEM data are compared by [146] with drilled sections of the massive sulfide volumes from the Touro copper deposit in Spain, which showed excellent correlation. Ref. [147] presents results from ground electrical and electromagnetic surveys carried out at Koillismaa Layered Intrusion Complex in northeastern Finland. Ref. [148] presents a Deep EM Sounding for Mineral Exploration (DESMEX) investigation in a graphite mining district in eastern Bavaria, Germany, where IP effects were observed in 3D inversions.
4.5. North America
Ref. [149] compares resistivity maps estimated from ground and various AEM surveys conducted over the Midwest uranium deposit located in Saskatchewan, Canada. Ref. [150] contrasts SPECTREM fixed-wing and ZTEM natural audio-frequency inversion results from surveys flown over Pebble deposit in Alaska, USA. Ref. [151] presents the results of helicopter natural EM field measurements over the low sulfidation epithermal gold–silver vein systems at Gold Springs located in southeastern Nevada, USA. Ref. [152] presents inversion and interpretation of airborne natural EM field data over the Silver Queen polymetallic vein system located in BC, Canada. Ref. [153] compares results and interpretations of passive and time-domain helicopter surveys flown over the 501 project (Cu-Zn volcanogenic massive sulfide) at McFault’s Lake in northern Ontario, Canada. Ref. [154] presents airborne, ground, and borehole EM measurements over the Hood 10 volcanogenic hosted massive sulfide located in Nunavut, Canada. Ref. [155] analyzes the response of ground electromagnetic surveys conducted over the former Opemiska mine in Québec, Canada, where petrophysical studies, geological and geophysical data have been compiled. Ref. [156] presents a case study of a ZTEM survey conducted over sedimentary exhalative (SEDEX) lead-zinc deposits in Selwyn Basin, Yukon, Canada. Ref. [157] describes the results of the HELITEM system flown over the Lalor deposit in Manitoba, Canada. Ref. [158] investigates nine inversion strategies applied to co-located seismic and MT data sets from one of the Carlin gold deposit districts of north-central Nevada, USA. Ref. [159] analyzes AEM data for Lac Brûlé, Québec, Canada, over an anorthosite intrusion, and is able in some areas to distinguish, in the data, superparamagnetic (SPM) effects from IP effects. Ref. [160] compares 3D inversions of ZTEM and ground MT data over a Ag-Au-rich epithermal system in Canada, while Ref. [161] compares the same AEM system inversions over the Morrison porphyry Cu-Au-Mo deposit, both of which are located in British Columbia, Canada. Ref. [162] presents results of AEM time-domain and natural field data over the Dolly Varden Mine region of BC, which hosts silver and gold deposits. Ref. [163] presents airborne and ground, radiometric and EM, surveys collected over the Patterson Lake South uranium deposit located in Saskatchewan, Canada. Trial-and-error interpretation is attempted on EM data from the uranium rich Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan [164,165]. Ref. [166] presents an interpretation of AEM methods using the moment Gaussian model developed by [167] from the Athabasca Basin, Canada. Ref. [168] presents a study of forward modelling and 3D EM inversion from the McArthur River uranium deposit in the Athabasca Basin, Canada, integrating the finding about the quaternary geological cover impact on EM measurements.
4.6. South America
Ref. [169] presents 3D audiomagnetotelluric inversions over the Regis kimberlite pipe in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Ref. [170] evaluates a method of cooperative inversion on airborne TEM, controlled source magnetotellurics, and direct current resistivity data from the Antonio gold deposit in Peru. Ref. [171] presents Airborne Induced Polarization (AIP) inversions for data collected over the Lamego gold mine of the Quadrilátero Ferrífero area in Minas Gerais State, Brazil. Ref. [172] presents a review of historical ground and downhole EM data, identifying strong correlations with known nickel intersects from the Jaguar Nickel Project, a hydrothermal Iron-Oxide Nickel Copper (IONC) deposit located in the Carajas Mineral Province of Brazil.
4.7. Mixed Continents
Ref. [173] outlines an approach to extract IP information from AEM data using the Cole–Cole model on VTEM data collected from Mt Milligan, BC, Canada and Amakinskaya kimberlite pipe, Russia. Ref. [174] interprets in terms of Cole–Cole parameters AIP surveys conducted over various geologies and exploration targets, with examples of diamond, gold, and base metals deposits in northern Canada, Oman, and Australia. Ref. [175] compares 1D and 2D AEM inversion algorithms applied over areas of rough terrains in Iran and Norway. Ref. [176] presents case studies of application of AEM natural fields in exploring for various minerals across sites located in Canada and Kazakhstan.
5. Magnetics and Electromagnetics
5.1. Africa
Ref. [177] presents a robust airborne natural source processing approach, which is applied to data from the Kalahari-Copper-Belt in Namibia.
5.2. Asia
Ref. [178] describes geological mapping and detailed geophysical surveys for chromite exploration at Tangarparha, India. Ref. [179] presents airborne and ground geophysical measurements over the Elang Cu-Au porphyry deposit in Indonesia. Ref. [180] presents results of helicopter natural EM fields and magnetics flown over the Ad Duwayhi intrusion-related gold deposit in Saudi Arabia. Ref. [181] presents advanced processing and interpretation, for AEM, magnetic, and radiometric data from the Mohar cauldron, India, with uranium potential. Ref. [182] compares magnetic and electromagnetic (EM) results from time-domain (VTEM) and AFMAG (ZTEM) flown over the Nuqrah SEDimentary EXhalative (SEDEX) massive sulfide deposits located in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Ref. [183] presents the results of audio MT and ground magnetic surveys which help image the alteration and mineralization system of the epithermal gold deposit, Tuoniuhe, in northeast China. Ref. [184] presents results of a comprehensive analysis of 2D CSAMT imaging over an important copper polymetallic ore field in Zhongxingtun area, Inner Mongolia, China. From 2D profile CSAMT inversions, Ref. [185] investigates the electrical resistivity structure of the Zhaishang gold deposit, in West Qinling, China. Ref. [186] combines magnetics, TEM, and magnetotellurics to locate an iron ore body from southern Liaoning province, China. Ref. [187] uses potential field and electromagnetic data interpretation to provide new information on the copper-zinc Xiaorequanzi deposit, in northwest China. Ref. [188] presents a study analyzing magnetic and VLF-EM data to delineate anomalous zones related to gold-associated sulfide mineralization in the North Singhbhum Mobile Belt of eastern India. Ref. [189] presents results of ground magnetic and VLF-EM surveys conducted over the Hatinitor Pahar and Kadwara areas of India, which are probable kimberlite zones.
5.3. Australia
Ref. [190] reviews the various geophysical methods that have been tested over the high grade Ag-Zn-Pb Cannington deposit located in Queensland. Ref. [191] reviews integrated interpretation of geophysical surveys with geological data applied in the interpretation and exploration of detrital iron deposits in Western Australia. Ref. [192] describes ground EM, magnetic, and gravity surveys obtained over the Gurubang volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS) deposit located in New South Wales. Ref. [193] present results of ground and airborne surveys conducted over the Wafi-Golpu porphyry system.
5.4. Europe
Ref. [194] analyzes the geophysical characteristics of a strongly-conductive horizon in northern Sweden, associated with thin layers of pyrrhotite and graphite. Ref. [195] derives a 3D conductivity volume from 2D MT-inverted sections of data collected over the Kevitsa Ni-Cu-PGE deposit in Finland. Ref. [196] develops a new boundary detection technique that identifies and removes uniform layers from the 3D model, leaving edges. The method allows for the visualization of property edges, which are generated from the geophysical inversion of data from the Kevitsa Ni-Cu-PGE deposit in Lapland, Finland.
5.5. North America
Ref. [197] presents an application of lithoclassification using the self-organizing maps (SOM) technique, which uses EM, gravity and magnetic data from the Reid–Mahaffy test site in Ontario, Canada. Ref. [198] characterizes the Cu-Au-Mo Pebble porphyry deposit in Alaska, USA, using geophysical data, drillhole information, and physical properties.
Ref. [199] presents results and preliminary interpretation of AEM and magnetic surveys over the massive sulfide Lalor deposit in Manitoba, Canada, while [200,201] present inversion results of EM and airborne magnetic data collected over the same deposit. Ref. [202] presents an integration of inversion of aeromagnetic, gravity, and MT data with physical property measurements and geological information, thus facilitating a better understanding of the NICO Au-Co-Bi-Cu deposit, Northwest Territories, Canada. Ref. [203] combines MT, magnetics, and gravity to study the geophysical response of the Mountain Pass carbonatite, in California.
Ref. [204] presents results of joint inversions of two VTEM datasets and associated aeromagnetic datasets, from two surveys flown six years apart over a VMS gold prospect in northern Ontario, Canada. Results of inversions over Tli Kwi Cho kimberlites from Northwest Territories, Canada, are presented for potential field data [205], airborne AEM conductivity [206] and chargeability data [207]. Ref. [208] compiles historical apparent resistivity and induced polarization data combined with recent AEM surveys to infer structurally complex zones in the gold-rich, Canadian Malartic district, from Québec, Canada. Ref. [209] uses a supervised machine learning algorithm to classify rock types throughout the Kliyul porphyry prospect in British Columbia, Canada. Ref. [210] inverts magnetic and frequency-domain EM data over gold-rich, Canadian Malartic district, and interprets the results in terms of lithologies. Ref. [211] presents modelling and analysis of helicopter EM data resulting in physical property models and magnetic derivatives which characterize shallow parts of the Stillwater Complex, USA, rich in PGE, nickel, copper, and chromium. Ref. [212] describes data, interpretation, and targeting approach of a helicopter time domain EM, magnetic, and radiometric survey over epithermal Au-Ag deposits in north central BC, in Canada. Ref. [213] describes the results of airborne natural EM field and magnetic survey conducted over porphyry copper occurrences near Houston, also in BC.
5.6. South America
Ref. [214] compares ground resistivity/IP, airborne EM, and magnetic responses, supported by 3D inversions, over the Romero and Romero South Au-Cu-Zn-Ag epithermal deposit area of Dominican Republic. Ref. [215] describes the data and interpretation of an airborne EM, magnetic, and radiometric survey flown over the Cerro Quema high sulfidation epithermal gold deposits in Panama. Ref. [216] describes airborne EM and magnetic survey results from the Panama Cobre porphyry copper camp, which includes the Balboa deposit.
6. Discussion
The numerous references presented show that magnetic and EM techniques are still popular for mineral exploration and that this field represents an active area of research with many papers published in various scientific journals. In particular, drone magnetic surveys have gained popularity. We have compiled the different case studies (drone studies excluded) by target type and continents for the magnetic technique in Table 1, the EM technique in Table 2, and a combination of magnetic and EM techniques in Table 3.
These results can be used to produce various histograms and only the most meaningful are presented. The simplest one presented in Figure 1 shows the number of research papers for each method while Figure 2 shows the number of papers by continent. The majority of case studies are compiled for the magnetic method and describes surveys conducted in North America, followed by Asia and Australia, while other continents have smaller but similar numbers of papers. The popularity of the magnetic technique may be a reflection of the fact that this technique is used both as a direct and an indirect method of exploration. Magnetic surveys can be conducted to directly detect magnetic material like iron ore, while during the search of other deposits they are used mainly to map the geology, using the rock magnetite content as a geological indicator or structural marker. In general, EM surveys directly detect the conductive mineralization, although in uranium exploration they detect conductors associated with the mineralization.
Going into more detail, an histogram of the number of papers by method and continent (Figure 3) shows distinct patterns. Electromagnetic and magnetic paper numbers are the same in North America, while magnetic methods are more popular in other continents except Europe, where EM methods are favored. The combination of magnetic and EM techniques is popular in North America and Asia. Although the number of case studies documented in a particular continent is function of various factors such as the geography and metallogeny, the mining market, the exploration activity, the number of researchers in each continent, and the bias of the scientific journals that were used for this study, it is, therefore, a first-order indication of the preference for each method in these continents.
The following figures illustrate the distribution of the various deposit types documented. In Figure 4, the total number for each target type is presented. The classification of the deposits was based on the information provided by the authors of the case studies and is sometimes more commercial than geological. However, characteristic features can be observed. Gold mineralizations are the most popular, followed by porphyry copper, polymetallic, massive sulfides, uranium, Ni-Cu-PGE, iron ore, kimberlite, and IOCG.
In Figure 5, these types of mineralization are classified by methods. Magnetic techniques are favored for gold, iron ore, and polymetallic, while electromagnetic methods are used for uranium, massive sulfides, and gold. Both methods characterize porphyry copper, massive sulfides, and gold.
Figure 6 presents the same information by continents. Gold and polymetallic-style mineralization are studied in Africa, while gold, polymetallic, and kimberlite are studied in Asia. In Australia, gold and massive sulfides are studied geophysically, while in Europe, case studies for Ni-Cu-PGE, polymetallic, and graphite are more popular. In North America, studies have been conducted predominantly on uranium, porphyry copper, massive sulfides, gold, kimberlite, and others. In South America, iron ore, IOCG, and porphyry copper mineralizations have been studied.
7. Conclusions
The field of geophysical exploration for mineral deposits is very active with a constant flow of new developments, in particular in magnetic and EM techniques, as developers have been eager to adapt new technologies to new geophysical applications. Our review of the documented case studies over the last fifteen years is unfortunately an incomplete compilation of the geophysical activity around the world during this period, as not all geophysical activity is documented in the reviewed papers. First, case studies provide an incomplete description of the technological developments. Furthermore, in our review, applications of the magnetic and electromagnetic techniques in North America, Asia, and Australia predominate over applications in other continents. This predominance is attributed to different factors, ranging from academic and metallogeny, to mining market, and journals selected. Despite these limitations, this review provides detailed information about the usage of magnetic and EM techniques, encompassing a wide range of geological environments. The magnetic method is slightly more popular and this popularity is attributed to the fact that it can be both a direct and an indirect indicator of mineralization. Magnetic and EM techniques were utilized for many different target types, with a preference for gold, porphyry copper, polymetallic, massive sulfides, uranium, Ni-Cu-PGE, iron ore, kimberlite, and iron-oxide copper-gold. They are also popular for a range of small applications which are continent-specific. The variety of case studies presented in this review should help in selecting and designing geophysical surveys in a new area or domain as well in helping to better elucidate the challenges encountered in a specific geological environment, given the limitations of each technique.
Conceptualization, M.A.V. and M.M.; methodology, M.A.V.; validation, M.A.V., M.M. and K.K.; investigation, M.A.V.; resources, M.A.V.; writing—original draft preparation, M.A.V.; writing—review and editing, M.A.V., M.M. and K.K.; visualization, M.A.V.; supervision, M.M.; project administration, M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Marc A. Vallée, Mouhamed Moussaoui and Khorram Khan are employees of Geo Data Solutions GDS Inc. The paper reflects the views of the scientists and not the company.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Enlarge this image.Figure 4. Number of case studies by types of mineralization (IOCG: Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold, IONC: Iron-Oxide Nickel-Copper, MS: Massive Sulfides, MVLZ: Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc, SEDEX: SEDimentary EXhalative lead-zinc).
Enlarge this image.Figure 5. Types of mineralization by method: (a) magnetics, (b) electromagnetics, and (c) magnetics and electromagnetics (IOCG: Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold, IONC: Iron-Oxide Nickel-Copper, MS: Massive Sulfides, MVLZ: Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc, SEDEX: SEDimentary EXhalative lead-zinc).
Enlarge this image.Figure 5. Types of mineralization by method: (a) magnetics, (b) electromagnetics, and (c) magnetics and electromagnetics (IOCG: Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold, IONC: Iron-Oxide Nickel-Copper, MS: Massive Sulfides, MVLZ: Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc, SEDEX: SEDimentary EXhalative lead-zinc).
Enlarge this image.Figure 6. Types and numbers of mineralizations by continent: (a) Africa, (b) Asia, (c) Australia, (d) Europe, (e) North America, and (f) South America (IOCG: Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold, IONC: Iron-Oxide Nickel-Copper, MS: Massive Sulfides, MVLZ: Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc, SEDEX: SEDimentary EXhalative lead-zinc).
Enlarge this image.Figure 6. Types and numbers of mineralizations by continent: (a) Africa, (b) Asia, (c) Australia, (d) Europe, (e) North America, and (f) South America (IOCG: Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold, IONC: Iron-Oxide Nickel-Copper, MS: Massive Sulfides, MVLZ: Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc, SEDEX: SEDimentary EXhalative lead-zinc).
Enlarge this image.Figure 6. Types and numbers of mineralizations by continent: (a) Africa, (b) Asia, (c) Australia, (d) Europe, (e) North America, and (f) South America (IOCG: Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold, IONC: Iron-Oxide Nickel-Copper, MS: Massive Sulfides, MVLZ: Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc, SEDEX: SEDimentary EXhalative lead-zinc).
Compilation of case studies by application of magnetics (IOCG: Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold, MS: Massive Sulfides).
| Deposit Type | Africa | Asia | Australia | Europe | North America | South America |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apatite | [ | [ | ||||
| Carbonatite | [ | [ | [ | |||
| Copper | [ | [ | ||||
| Gemstones | [ | [ | ||||
| Gold | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |
| IOCG | [ | [ | [ | |||
| Iron ore | [ | [ | [ | [ | ||
| Kimberlite | [ | [ | ||||
| Lateritic Ni | [ | |||||
| Magnesite | [ | |||||
| Manganese | [ | [ | ||||
| MS | [ | |||||
| Ni-Cu-PGE | [ | |||||
| Phosphate | [ | |||||
| Polymetallic | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |
| Porphyry Cu | [ | [ | [ | [ | ||
| Rutile | [ | |||||
| Uranium | [ |
Compilation of case studies by application of electromagnetics (IONC: Iron-Oxide Nickel-Copper, MS: Massive Sulfides, MVLZ: Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc, SEDEX: SEDimentary EXhalative lead-zinc).
| Deposit Type | Africa | Asia | Australia | Europe | North America | South America |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bostonite | [ | |||||
| Chromite | [ | |||||
| Cobalt | [ | |||||
| Copper | [ | [ | ||||
| Gold | [ | [ | [ | [ | ||
| Gold & zinc | [ | [ | ||||
| Graphite | [ | |||||
| IONC | [ | |||||
| Iron ore | [ | [ | ||||
| Kimberlite | [ | [ | [ | |||
| Manganese | [ | |||||
| Molybdenum | [ | |||||
| MS | [ | [ | [ | |||
| MVLZ | [ | [ | ||||
| Ni-Cu-PGE | [ | [ | [ | |||
| Polymetallic | [ | [ | [ | [ | ||
| Porphyry Cu | [ | [ | ||||
| Rutile | [ | |||||
| SEDEX | [ | |||||
| Silver | [ | |||||
| Uranium | [ | [ | [ | [ |
Compilation of case studies on application by magnetics and electromagnetics (IOCG: Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold, MS: Massive Sulfides, SEDEX: SEDimentary EXhalative lead-zinc).
| Deposit Type | Africa | Asia | Australia | Europe | North America | South America |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carbonatite | [ | |||||
| Chromite | [ | |||||
| Copper | [ | |||||
| Copper-zinc | [ | |||||
| Detrital iron | [ | |||||
| Epithermal gold | [ | [ | ||||
| Gold | [ | [ | ||||
| Graphite | [ | |||||
| IOCG | [ | |||||
| Iron ore | [ | |||||
| Kimberlite | [ | [ | ||||
| MS | [ | [ | ||||
| Ni-Cu-PGE | [ | [ | ||||
| Polymetallic | [ | |||||
| Porphyry Cu | [ | [ | [ | [ | ||
| SEDEX | [ | |||||
| Silver | [ | |||||
| Uranium | [ |
References
1. Nabighian, M.N.; Grauch, V.J.S.; Hansen, R.O.; LaFehr, T.R.; Li, Y.; Peirce, J.W.; Phillips, J.D.; Ruder, M.E. The historical development of the magnetic method in exploration. Geophysics; 2005; 70, pp. 33ND-61ND. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.2133784]
2. Grant, F.S. Aeromagnetics, geology and ore environments, I. Magnetite in igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks: An overview. Geoexploration; 1985; 23, pp. 303-333. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0016-7142(85)90001-8]
3. Zhdanov, M.S. Electromagnetic geophysics: Notes from the past and the road ahead. Geophysics; 2010; 75, pp. 75A49-75A66. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.3483901]
4. Palacky, G.J. Resistivity Characteristics of Geologic Targets. Electromagnetic Methods in Applied Geophysics: Volume I, Theory; Nabighian, M.N. Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Tulsa, OK, USA, 1987; pp. 53-129.
5. Smith, R. Electromagnetic Induction Methods in Mining Geophysics from 2008 to 2012. Surv. Geophys.; 2014; 35, pp. 123-156. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10712-013-9227-1]
6. S&P Global Market Intelligence. The Big Picture 2023 Metals and Mining Industry Outlook; S&P Global Market Intelligence: New York, NY, USA, 2022.
7. Reichl, C.; Schatz, M. World Mining Data 2024; Federal Ministry of Finance: Vienna, Austria, 2023.
8. Hammond, A.C.R. The 20 Biggest Advances in Tech Over the Last 20 Years; Foundation of Economic Education: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2020.
9. Palandrani, P. A Decade of Change: How Tech Evolved in the 2010s an What’s in Store for the 2020s; Nasdaq: New York, NY, USA, 2022.
10. Vallée, M.A.; Smith, R.S.; Keating, P. Metalliferous mining geophysics—State of the art after a decade in the new millennium. Geophysics; 2011; 76, pp. W31-W50. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.3587224]
11. Nabighian, M.N.; Asten, M.W. Metalliferous mining geophysics–State of the art in the last decade of the 20th century and the beginning of the new millennium. Geophysics; 2002; 67, pp. 964-978. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1484538]
12. Hodges, D.G.; Christensen, A.N. Airborne Geophysics. Proceedings of the Exploration 17: Sixth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration; Toronto, ON, Canada, 22–25 October 2017; pp. 5-16.
13. Fairhead, J.D.; Cooper, G.R.J.; Sander, S. Advances in Airborne Gravity and Magnetics. Proceedings of the Exploration 17: Sixth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration; Toronto, ON, Canada, 22–25 October 2017; pp. 113-127.
14. Macnae, J. Advances in Electromagnetic Data Processing: Noise, Signal, SPM and AIP. Proceedings of the Exploration 17: Sixth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration; Toronto, ON, Canada, 22–25 October 2017; pp. 191-208.
15. Macnae, J.; Hennessy, L. Magnetic Field Sensors for EM Geophysics. Proceedings of the Exploration 17: Sixth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration; Toronto, ON, Canada, 22–25 October 2017.
16. Farquharson, C.G.; Lelièvre, P.G. Modelling and Inversion for Mineral Exploration Geophysics: A Review of Recent Progress, the Current State-of-the-Art, and Future Directions. Proceedings of the Exploration 17: Sixth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration; Toronto, ON, Canada, 22–25 October 2017; pp. 51-74.
17. Jones, A.G. Magnetotellurics: Status Quo and Quo Vadimus. Proceedings of the Exploration 17: Sixth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration; Toronto, ON, Canada, 22–25 October 2017; pp. 139-158.
18. Chave, A.D.; Jones, A.G. The Magnetotelluric Method: Theory and Practice; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2018.
19. Duncan, A. Advances in Ground and Borehole EM Survey Technology to 2017. Proceedings of the Exploration 17: Sixth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration; Toronto, ON, Canada, 22–25 October 2017; pp. 169-182.
20. Zhang, B.; Qu, K.; Yin, C.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Ren, X.; Su, Y. Review on 3D electromagnetic modeling and inversion for Mineral Exploration. Geophysics; 2025; 90, pp. WA47-WA59. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2024-0132.1]
21. Caron, R.M.; Samson, C.; Straznicky, P.; Ferguson, S.; Sander, L. Aeromagnetic surveying using a simulated unmanned aircraft system. Geophys. Prospect.; 2014; 62, pp. 352-363. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12075]
22. Li, F.; Li, J.; Cui, Z.; Xu, Z. UAV-borne magnetic survey in Duobaoshan exploration area, Heilongjiang, China. International Workshop and Gravity, Electrical & Magnetic Methods and Their Applications, Chenghu, China, 19–22 April 2015; Society of Exploration Geophysicists and and Chinese Geophysical Society: Houston, TX, USA, 2015; Volume 520.
23. Malehmir, A.; Dynesius, L.; Paulusson, K.; Paulusson, A.; Johansson, H.; Bastani, M.; Wedmark, M.; Marsden, P. The potential of rotary-wing UAV-based magnetic surveys for mineral exploration: A case study from central Sweden. Lead. Edge; 2017; 36, pp. 552-557. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/tle36070552.1]
24. Cunningham, M.; Samson, C.; Wood, A.; Cook, I. Aeromagnetic Surveying with a Rotary-Wing Unmanned Aircraft System: A Case Study from a Zinc Deposit in Nash Creek, New Brunswick, Canada. Pure Appl. Geophys.; 2018; 175, pp. 3145-3158. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1736-2]
25. Cunningham, M.; Samson, C.; Laliberté, J.; Goldie, M.; Wood, A.; Birkett, D. Comparison Between Ground, Helicopter, and Unmanned Aircraft System Magnetic Datasets: A Case Study from the Abitibi Greenstone Belt, Canada. Pure Appl. Geophys.; 2022; 179, pp. 1871-1886. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00024-022-03025-9]
26. Døssing, A.; Kolster, M.E.; Rasmussen, T.M.; Petersen, J.T.; da Silva, E.L.S. UAV-towed scalar magnetic gradiometry: A case study in relation to iron oxide copper-gold mineralization, Nautanen (Arctic Sweden). Lead. Edge; 2023; 42, pp. 103-111. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/tle42020103.1]
27. Eremenco, D.; Parker, C.; Griffin, S.; Donaldson, M.; Cattach, M. Low-Frequency UAV SAM trials at Forrestania Electromagnetic Test Range in Western Australia. Proceedings of the 1st ASEG DISCOVER Symposium; Hobart, Australia, 15–18 October 2024.
28. Walter, C.; Braun, A.; Fotopoulos, G. High-resolution unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic surveys for mineral exploration targets. Geophys. Prospect.; 2020; 68, pp. 334-349. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12914]
29. Cunningham, M.; Samson, C.; Laliberté, J.; Goldie, M.; Wood, A.; Birkett, D. Inversion of Magnetic Data Acquired with a Rotary-Wing Unmanned Aircraft System for Gold Exploration. Pure Appl. Geophys.; 2021; 178, pp. 501-516. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00024-021-02664-8]
30. Kim, B.; Jeong, S.; Bang, E.; Shin, S.; Cho, S. Investigation of Iron Ore Mineral Distribution Using Aero-Magnetic Exploration Techniques: Case Study at Pocheon, Korea. Minerals; 2021; 11, 665. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min11070665]
31. Zhou, W.; Zhang, C.; Tang, H.; Li, Q.; Tang, S. Iterative imaging method based on Tikhonov regularized downward continuation and its unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic application: A case study from a Sijiaying iron deposit in eastern Hebei Province, China. Geophysics; 2023; 88, pp. B343-B354. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2022-0699.1]
32. Lee, M.; Madriz, Y.; Gloagen, R.; McEnroe, S. UAV magnetics over the Bjerkreim-Sokndal Intrusion, Rogaland, Norway: A first look. Lead. Edge; 2023; 42, pp. 90-97. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/tle42020090.1]
33. Kaminski, V.; Davydenko, Y.; Bukhalov, S.; Goryachev, I. Combined ground-UAV TDEM survey over gold prospect in BaikalPatom Highlands (eastern Russia) with detection of AIP effect. Proceedings of the 8th International Airborne Electromagnetics Workshop (AEM2023); Fitzroy Island, Australia, 4–7 September 2023.
34. Shahsavani, H.; Smith, R.S. Aeromagnetic gradiometry with UAV, a case study on small iron ore deposit. Drone Syst. Appl.; 2024; 12, pp. 1-9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1139/dsa-2023-0126]
35. Matende, K.; Mickus, K. Magnetic and gravity investigation of kimberlites in north-central Botswana. Geophysics; 2021; 86, pp. B67-B78. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2020-0450.1]
36. Ejiga, E.G.; Ismail, N.E.H.; Yusoff, I. Implementing Digital Edge Enhancers on Improved High-Resolution Aeromagnetic Signals for Structural-Depth Analysis around the Middle Benue Trough, Nigeria. Minerals; 2021; 11, 1247. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min11111247]
37. Vatankhah, S.; Renaut, R.A.; Mickus, K.; Liu, S.; Matende, K. A comparison of the joint and independent inversions for magnetic and gravity data over kimberlites in Botswana. Geophys. Prospect.; 2022; 70, pp. 1602-1616. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13265]
38. El-Raouf, A.A.; Doğru, F.; Abdelrahman, K.; Fnais, M.S.; El Manharawy, A.; Amer, O. Using Airborne Geophysical and Geochemical Methods to Map Structures and Their Related Gold Mineralization. Minerals; 2023; 13, 237. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min13020237]
39. Diallo, S.; Ndam Njikam, M.M.; Yem, M.; Quentin Yene Atangana, J.; Ribodetti, A.; Raouf, A. Integration of magnetic and geological field data into geological mapping and rutile mineralization targets in the Minta locality (Haute-Sanaga, Cameroon). Explor. Geophys.; 2023; 54, pp. 670-684. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2023.2210158]
40. Mbang, C.M.S.; Mouzong, M.P.; Cheng, L.Z.; Tafone, J.L.M.; Basseka, C.A.; Kamguia, J.; Etamè, J. Spatial Relations between Geological Structures and Precious and Base Metal Deposits from Magnetic Investigation of the Pangar-Djérem Zone, Cameroon. Int. J. Geophys.; 2023; 2023, 4872249. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/4872249]
41. Olawuyi, A.K. In-situ Location of Precious Stones using Magnetic Data and Pseudo-Gravity Transforms in Parts of the Nupe Basin Area of Nigeria. SQU J. Sci.; 2024; 29, pp. 86-94.
42. Sanusi, S.O.; Josiah, D.I.A.; Olaniyan, O.; Olayanju, G.M. Delineation of Potential Gold Mineralization Zones in the Kushaka Schist Belt, Northcentral Nigeria, Using Geochemical, Ground Magnetic, Induced Polarization, and Electrical Resistivity Methods. Min. Metall. Explor.; 2024; 41, pp. 2007-2029. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s42461-024-01033-y]
43. Bahi, A.; Zerradi, Y.; Bziaz, M.; Tlidi, Y.; Soufi, A.; Bennouna, R.; Chakiri, S. Characterization of Mineral Meposits Using the Magnetic Method: The Case of the Aïn Beida Mine in Bouarfa, Morocco. Civ. Environ. Eng.; 2024; 20, pp. 571-579. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2478/cee-2024-0043]
44. Deep, M.A.; Ibrahim, A.S.; Saleh, A. Geophysical Assessment of Structurally Controlled Mineral Resources at Wadi El-Nakheel, Eastern Desert, Egypt. Resources; 2024; 13, 83. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/resources13060083]
45. Augie, A.I.; Salako, K.A.; Rafiu, A.A.; Jimoh, M.O. Integrated Geophysical Investigation for Potential Gold Mineralised Zone within Lower Part of Zuru Schist Belts, NW Nigeria. Niger. J. Phys.; 2024; 33, pp. 1-14. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.62292/njp.v33(s).2024.212]
46. Vatankhah, S.; Lelièvre, P.G.; Matende, K.; Mickus, K. Magnetic surface geometry inversion of Kimberlites in Botswana. Geophys. Prospect.; 2024; 72, pp. 3524-3546. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13588]
47. Harris, T.M.; Murphy, F.B. Geophysical Signatures of a +5.4Moz gold deposit, NE Bankan, Guinea, West Africa. Proceedings of the ASEG DISCOVER Symposium (ASEG); Hobart, Australia, 15–18 October 2024.
48. Lü, Q.; Qi, G.; Yan, J. 3D geologic model of Shizishan ore field constrained by gravity and magnetic interactive modeling: A case history. Geophysics; 2013; 78, pp. B25-B35. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2012-0126.1]
49. Almasi, A.; Jafarirad, A.; Kheyrollahi, H.; Rahimi, M.; Afzal, P. Evaluation of structural and geological factors in orogenic gold type mineralisation in the Kervian area, north-west Iran, using airborne geophysical data. Explor. Geophys.; 2014; 45, pp. 261-270. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG13053]
50. Mandal, A.; Mohanty, W.K.; Sharma, S.P.; Biswas, A.; Sen, J.; Bhatt, A.K. Geophysical signatures of uranium mineralization and its subsurface validation at Beldih, Purulia District, West Bengal, India: A case study. Geophys. Prospect.; 2015; 63, pp. 713-726. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12205]
51. Kheyrollahi, H.; Alinia, F.; Ghods, A. Regional magnetic lithologies and structures as controls on porphyry copper deposits: Evidence from Iran. Explor. Geophys.; 2018; 49, pp. 98-110. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG16042]
52. Sun, S.; Chen, C.; Liu, Y. Constrained 3D inversion of magnetic data with structural orientation and borehole lithology: A case study in the Macheng iron deposit, Hebei, China. Geophysics; 2019; 84, pp. B121-B133. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0257.1]
53. Sunder Raju, P.V.; Satish Ku, K. Magnetic Survey for Iron-Oxide-Copper-Gold (IOCG) and Alkali Calcic Alteration Signatures in Gadarwara, M.P, India: Implications on Copper Metallogeny. Minerals; 2020; 10, 671. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min10080671]
54. Hasani, M.; Sharghi, Y.; Tercan, A.E. Separation of geomagnetic anomalies in the Bashmaq area in northwestern Iran by factorial kriging. Explor. Geophys.; 2021; 52, pp. 540-550. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2020.1845095]
55. Riahi, S.; Bahroudi, A.; Abedi, M.; Aslani, S.; Elyasi, G.-R. Integration of airborne geophysics and satellite imagery data for exploration targeting in porphyry Cu systems: Chahargonbad district, Iran. Geophys. Prospect.; 2021; 69, pp. 1116-1137. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13092]
56. Liu, Y.-X.; Li, W.-Y.; Liu, Z.-Y.; Zhao, J.-W.; Cao, A.-Q.; Gao, S.; Wang, L.-J.; Yang, C. Occurrence Characteristics of Magnetite and Aeromagnetic Prospecting Northeast of Hebei Province. Minerals; 2022; 12, 1158. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min12091158]
57. Shabani, A.; Ziaii, M.; Monfared, M.S.; Shirazy, A.; Shirazi, A. Multi-Dimensional Data Fusion for Mineral Prospectivity Mapping (MPM) Using Fuzzy-AHP Decision-Making Method, Kodegan-Basiran Region, East Iran. Minerals; 2022; 12, 1629. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min12121629]
58. Babu, S.B.; Patel, S.K.; Singh, R.B. An integrated geophysical approach for gold from Wayand-Nilambur granulite terrain, Kerala (India). Geol. J.; 2024; 59, pp. 1794-1811. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gj.4970]
59. Ji, N.; Qin, X.; Du, W.; Wang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, T. The Application of Aeromagnetic 3-D Geophysical Inversion in the Exploration of Lead–Zinc Polymetallic Deposits in Forested Areas. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett.; 2024; 21, 3433458. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/LGRS.2024.3433458]
60. Zhang, H.; Li, H.; Hu, X. Fine interpretation of magnetic data for a concealed mineral deposit: A case study of the Fe-polymetallic deposit from Western China. J. Appl. Geophys.; 2024; 228, 105468. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2024.105468]
61. Vella, L.; Cawood, M. Geophysical Characteristics of the Carrapateena Iron-Oxide Copper-Gold Deposit. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2012; 2012, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2012ab160]
62. Donohue, J.; Hill, Q.; Brewster, D. Geophysics at the Hawsons Iron Project, NSW—Eastern Australia’s new magnetite resource. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2012; 2012, pp. 1-6. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2012ab210]
63. Clark, D.A. New methods for interpretation of magnetic vector and gradient tensor data II: Application to the Mount Leyshon anomaly, Queensland, Australia. Explor. Geophys.; 2013; 44, pp. 114-127. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG12066]
64. Clark, D.A. New methods for interpretation of magnetic vector and gradient tensor data I: Eigenvector analysis and the normalised source strength. Explor. Geophys.; 2012; 43, pp. 267-282. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG12020]
65. Austin, J.; Schmidt, P.; Lilly, R. Anisotropy of Magnetic Susceptibility (AMS) and Paleomagnetism applied to the differentiation of structural and metallogenic controls on Iron Oxide Copper-Gold (IOCG) mineralization: A case study from Monakoff, NW Queensland. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2013; 2013, pp. 1-5. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2013ab085]
66. Mosusu, N.T.; Verave, R.T.; Irarue, P.Y. Magnetic responses from an iron-rich gossan in a volcanogenic terrain and a limestone-hosted strata-bound manganese deposit, Central Province, Papua New Guinea. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2013; 2013, pp. 1-4.
67. Monoury, S.; Jupp, B.; Foley, A. Mine Scale Constrained Geophysical Inversion; A Case Study at the Darlot-Centenary Gold Mine. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2015; 2015, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2015ab040]
68. Banaszczyk, S.; Dentith, M.; Wallace, Y. Constrained Magnetic Modelling of the Wallaby Gold Deposit, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2015; 2015, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2015ab290]
69. Coote, A.; Erceg, M. Application of Petrology & Geology to the Interpretation of Geophysical Data in Defining Economic Porphyry-Related Cu-Au Mineralisation Along the Ekuti Range, Morobe Province, PNG. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2016; 2016, pp. 1-8.
70. Fabris, A.; Katona, L.; Reed, G.; Keeping, T.; Gordon, G.; Gouthas, G.; Swain, G. Mapping the Punt Hill IOCG system using geophysical, geochemical and spectral methods—An integrated approach. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2016; 2016, pp. 1-9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2016ab268]
71. Kumwenda, J.; Lackie, M. Geophysical interpretation of the geology of the Stanthorpe region using aeromagnetic, gravity and radiometric data. Explor. Geophys.; 2019; 50, pp. 653-666. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2019.1659102]
72. Pears, G.; Reid, J.; McGaughey, J.; Turner, W.; Hird, G. 3D interpretation of geological, 3D seismic and conventional geophysical data from the Darlot Gold Mine. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2019; 2019, pp. 1-5. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/22020586.2019.12073209]
73. Eshaghi, E.; Reading, A.M.; Roach, M.; Duffett, M.; Bombardieri, D.; Cracknell, M.J.; Everard, J.L.; Cumming, G.; Kuhn, S. Inverse modeling constrained by potential field data, petrophysics, and improved geologic mapping: A case study from prospective northwest Tasmania. Geophysics; 2020; 85, pp. K13-K26. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2019-0636.1]
74. Joly, A.; Reid, J.; Pears, G.; Paiement, J.-P.; Potter, D.; Healy, M.; Dunstone, K.; Hamill, J.; Nish, A. Integrated 3D modelling and associated machine learning targeting: The Jaguar Greenstone Belt example. Proceedings of the Australasian Exploration Geoscience Conference (AEGC); Brisbane, Australia, 15–17 March 2023.
75. Aydin, I.; Uyanik, O.; Oksum, E.; Aydogan, M.S. Geophysical applications for Fe-rich emery exploration in the Elmacik area on the Menderes Massif (Turkey). Explor. Geophys.; 2011; 42, pp. 159-166. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG09004]
76. Kamm, J.; Lundin, I.A.; Bastani, M.; Sadeghi, M.; Pedersen, L.B. Joint inversion of gravity, magnetic, and petrophysical data—A case study from a gabbro intrusion in Boden, Sweden. Geophysics; 2015; 80, pp. B131-B152. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0122.1]
77. Tavakoli, S.; Sarlus, Z.; Kronsell, I.; Bauer, T.E. 2.5D geophysical model of the Gällivare mining area: An integrated study to model the top 4 km of the subsurface and guide for future exploration activities. Geophys. Prospect.; 2021; 69, pp. 821-841. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13077]
78. Spicer, B.; Morris, B.; Ugalde, H. Structure of the Rambler Rhyolite, Baie Verte Peninsula, Newfoundland: Inversions using UBC-GIF Grav3D and Mag3D. J. Appl. Geophys.; 2011; 75, pp. 9-18. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.06.013]
79. Lee, M.; Morris, W.; Harris, J.; Leblanc, G. A network extraction tool for mineral exploration: A case study from the Wopmay Orogen, Northwest Territories, Canada. Explor. Geophys.; 2012; 43, pp. 116-124. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG11045]
80. Tschirhart, V.; Morris, W.A.; Jefferson, C.W.; Keating, P.; White, J.C.; Calhoun, L. 3D geophysical inversions of the north-east Amer Belt and their relationship to the geologic structure. Geophys. Prospect.; 2013; 61, pp. 547-560. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2012.01098.x]
81. Beiki, M.; Keating, P.; Clark, D.A. Interpretation of magnetic and gravity gradient tensor data using normalized source strength—A case study from McFaulds Lake, Northern Ontario, Canada. Geophys. Prospect.; 2014; 62, pp. 1180-1192. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12115]
82. Anderson, E.D.; Zhou, W.; Li, Y.; Hitzman, M.W.; Monecke, T.; Lang, J.R.; Kelley, K.D. Three-dimensional distribution of igneous rocks near the Pebble porphyry Cu-Au-Mo deposit in southwestern Alaska: Constraints from regional-scale aeromagnetic data. Geophysics; 2014; 79, pp. B63-B79. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2013-0326.1]
83. Olaniyan, O.; Smith, R.S.; Lafrance, B. A constrained potential field data interpretation of the deep geometry of the Sudbury structure. Can. J. Earth Sci.; 2014; 51, pp. 715-729. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2013-0212]
84. Olaniyan, O.; Smith, R.S.; Lafrance, B. Regional 3D geophysical investigation of the Sudbury Structure. Interpretation; 2015; 3, pp. SL63-SL81. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2014-0200.1]
85. Mahmoodi, O.; Smith, R.S.; Spicer, B. Using constrained inversion of gravity and magnetic field to produce a 3D litho-prediction model. Geophys. Prospect.; 2017; 65, pp. 1662-1679. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12484]
86. Tschirhart, V.; Pehrsson, S.J. New insights from geophysical data on the regional structure and geometry of the southwest Thelon Basin and its basement, Northwest Territories, Canada. Geophysics; 2016; 81, pp. B167-B178. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2015-0586.1]
87. Abbassi, B.; Cheng, L.Z.; Richards, J.P.; Hübert, J.; Legault, J.M.; Rebagliati, M.; Witherly, K. Geophysical properties of an epithermal Au-Ag deposit in British Columbia, Canada. Interpretation; 2018; 6, pp. T907-T918. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2017-0232.1]
88. Vallée, M.A.; Morris, W.A.; Perrouty, S.; Lee, R.G.; Wasyliuk, K.; King, J.J.; Ansdell, K.; Mir, R.; Shamsipour, P.; Farquharson, C.G. et al. Geophysical inversion contributions to mineral exploration: Lessons from the Footprints project. Can. J. Earth Sci.; 2019; 56, pp. 525-543. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2019-0009]
89. Vallée, M.A.; Farquharson, C.G.; Morris, W.A.; King, J.; Byrne, K.; Lesage, G.; Enkin, R.J. Comparison of geophysical inversion programs run on aeromagnetic data collected over the Highland Valley Copper district, British Columbia, Canada. Explor. Geophys.; 2019; 50, pp. 310-323. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2019.1604068]
90. Vallée, M.A.; Byrne, K.; King, J.J.; Lee, R.G.; Lesage, G.; Farquharson, C.G.; Chouteau, M.; Enkin, R.J. Imaging porphyry copper alteration using aeromagnetic data at Highland Valley Copper, British Columbia, Canada. Explor. Geophys.; 2020; 51, pp. 388-400. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2019.1699787]
91. Darijani, M.; Farquharson, C.G.; Lelièvre, P.G. Joint and constrained inversion of magnetic and gravity data: A case history from the McArthur River area, Canada. Geophysics; 2021; 86, pp. B79-B95. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2019-0818.1]
92. Astic, T.; Fournier, D.; Oldenburg, D.W. Joint inversion of potential-fields data over the DO-27 kimberlite pipe using a Gaussian mixture model prior. Interpretation; 2020; 8, pp. SS47-SS62. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2019-0283.1]
93. Shah, A.K.; Taylor, R.D.; Walsh, G.J.; Phillips, J.D. Integrated geophysical imaging of rare earth element-bearing iron oxide-apatite deposits in the Eastern Adirondack Highlands, New York. Geophysics; 2021; 86, pp. B37-B54. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2019-0783.1]
94. Carter-McAuslan, A.; Farquharson, C. Predictive geologic mapping from geophysical data using self-organizing maps: A case study from Baie Verte, Newfoundland, Canada. Geophysics; 2021; 86, pp. B249-B264. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2020-0756.1]
95. Rimando, J.; Peace, A.L.; Geng, M.; Verbaas, J.; Slade, H. Structural Setting of the Sixtymile Gold District, Yukon, Canada: Insights into Regional Deformation and Mineralization from Field Mapping and 3D Magnetic Inversion. Minerals; 2022; 12, 291. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min12030291]
96. Wei, X.; Li, K.; Sun, J. Mapping critical mineral resources using airborne geophysics, 3D joint inversion and geology differentiation: A case study of a buried niobium deposit in the Elk Creek carbonatite, Nebraska, USA. Geophys. Prospect.; 2023; 71, pp. 1247-1266. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13280]
97. de Carvalho Carneiro, C.; Fraser, S.J.; Crósta, A.P.; Silva, A.M.; de Mesquita Barros, C.E. Semiautomated geologic mapping using self-organizing maps and airborne geophysics in the Brazilian Amazon. Geophysics; 2012; 77, pp. K17-K24. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2011-0302.1]
98. Louro, V.H.A.; Mantovani, M.S.M.; Ribeiro, V.B. Magnetic field analysis of Morro do Leme nickel deposit. Geophysics; 2014; 79, pp. K1-K9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0131.1]
99. Martinez, C.; Li, Y. Lithologic characterization using airborne gravity gradient and aeromagnetic data for mineral exploration: A case study in the Quadrilátero Ferrífero, Brazil. Interpretation; 2015; 3, pp. SL1-SL13. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2014-0195.1]
100. Leão-Santos, M.; Li, Y.; Moraes, R. Application of 3D magnetic amplitude inversion to iron oxide-copper-gold deposits at low magnetic latitudes: A case study from Carajás Mineral Province, Brazil. Geophysics; 2015; 80, pp. B13-B22. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0082.1]
101. Mantovani, M.S.M.; Louro, V.H.A.; Ribeiro, V.B.; Requejo, H.S.; Santos, R.P.Z.d. Geophysical analysis of Catalão I alkaline–carbonatite complex in Goiás, Brazil. Geophys. Prospect.; 2016; 64, pp. 216-227. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12283]
102. Louro, V.H.A.; Mantovani, M.S.M.; Biondo Ribeiro, V.B. Integrated geologic and geophysical interpretation of the Buraco da Velha copper deposit (Rondônia, Brazil): A basis for exploring in related environments. Geophysics; 2017; 82, pp. B121-B133. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0345.1]
103. Melo, A.T.; Sun, J.; Yaoguo, L. Geophysical inversions applied to 3D geology characterization of an iron oxide copper-gold deposit in Brazil. Geophysics; 2017; 82, pp. K1-K13. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0490.1]
104. Yañez, G.; Ugalde, H.; Vargas, J.A. Topographic correction of magnetic data on rugged topography with application to Río Blanco-Los Bronces and El Teniente porphyry copper districts, Southern Andes, Chile. Explor. Geophys.; 2018; 49, pp. 595-607. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG17016]
105. Christiansen, R.; Kostadinoff, J.; Bouhier, J.; Martinez, P. Exploration of Iron ore deposits in Patagonia. Insights from gravity, magnetic and SP modelling. Geophys. Prospect.; 2018; 66, pp. 1751-1763. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12678]
106. Fonte-Boa, T.M.R.; Melo, A.T.; Novo, T.A. Interpolation artifacts as a result of spatial aliasing: A case study of the airborne magnetic data set of southeastern Minas Gerais, Brazil. Geophysics; 2020; 85, pp. B193-B205. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2019-0782.1]
107. de Matos, C.A.; Mendonça, C.A. Poisson magnetization-to-density-ratio and magnetization inclination properties of banded iron formations of the Carajás mineral province from processing airborne gravity and magnetic data. Geophysics; 2020; 85, pp. K1-K11. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2019-0421.1]
108. Melo, A.T.; Li, Y.; Hitzman, M. Is there hidden potential in Carajás? Insights through the geophysical signature of Cristalino deposit. Ore Geol. Rev.; 2020; 126, 103735. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2020.103735]
109. Sena, F.O.; Vasconcelos, M.A.R.; Pereira Cruz, S.C.; de Mendonça Freire, M.; Rangel, E.G.; Miranda, M.R. Magnetic modelling and physical properties of magnesite deposits and regional sequences of Serra das Éguas, Brumado, Brazil. Geophys. Prospect.; 2023; 71, pp. 336-349. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13303]
110. Bahía, M.E.; Strazzere, L.; Benedini, L.; Gregori, D.A.; Kostadinoff, J. Gravity and magnetic exploration applied to iron ore deposits in the Sierra Grande area, Río Negro Province, Argentina. Geophys. Prospect.; 2024; 72, pp. 1175-1188. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13458]
111. Thomas, M.D.; Ford, K.L.; Keating, P. Review paper: Exploration geophysics for intrusion-hosted rare metals. Geophys. Prospect.; 2016; 64, pp. 1275-1304. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12352]
112. Viezzoli, A.; Selfe, G. Comparing responses from different AEM systems and derived models at the Sunnyside nickel project, Botswana. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2018; 2018, pp. 1-8. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2018abW8_2E]
113. Osinowo, O.O.; Fashola, O.E.; Ayolabi, E.A.; Olayinka, A.I. Structural mapping and gold mineralisation potential evaluation from airborne time – domain electromagnetic (TDEM) data of Ilesha Schist Belt, southwestern Nigeria. Explor. Geophys.; 2022; 53, pp. 237-254. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2021.1922275]
114. Abdelsalam, H.F.; Yousef, M.H.M.; Shaheen, M.A.; Badr, H.M.; El-Hawary, A.M.; Al-Alfy, I.M. Integration of geoelectric and electromagnetic methods to delineate subsurface mineralization in bostonite rocks, South El-Atshan area, Central Eastern Desert, Egypt. Contrib. Geophys. Geod.; 2024; 54, pp. 191-212. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.31577/congeo.2024.54.2.4]
115. Chaturvedi, A.K.; Lotter, C.; Tripathi, S.; Maurya, A.K.; Patra, I.; Parihar, P.S. Integrated application of heliborne and ground electromagnetic surveys for mapping EM conductor for uranium exploration and its subsurface validation, North Delhi Fold Belt, Rajasthan, India: A case study. Geophysics; 2013; 78, pp. B13-B24. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2011-0523.1]
116. Hu, X.; Peng, R.; Wu, G.; Wang, W.; Huo, G.; Han, B. Mineral Exploration using CSAMT data: Application to Longmen region metallogenic belt, Guangdong Province, China. Geophysics; 2013; 78, pp. B111-B119. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2012-0115.1]
117. Babu, V.R.; Patra, I.; Tripathi, S.; Muthyala, S.; Chaturvedi, A.K. Inductive induced polarization effect in heliborne time-domain electromagnetic data for uranium exploration, northern part of Cuddapah Basin, India. Geophysics; 2017; 82, pp. B109-B120. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0291.1]
118. He, L.; Chen, L.; Dorji,; He, Z.; Wang, X.; Xiao, B.; Xu, L.; Zhao, X.; Xi, X.; Yao, H. et al. Mapping chromite deposits with audio magnetotellurics in the Luobusa ophiolite of southern Tibet. Geophysics; 2018; 83, pp. B47-B57. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2017-0110.1]
119. Li, H.; Di, Q.-Y.; Xue, G.-Q. A comparative study of inline and broadside time-domain controlled-source electromagnetic methods for mapping resistive targets on land. Geophysics; 2019; 84, pp. B235-B246. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0056.1]
120. Yan, J.; Zhang, K.; Jinhua, Z. Local uplift and copper metallogenic prospect in the Luzong ore district, Eastern China: Evidence from 3D magnetotelluric imaging. Explor. Geophys.; 2019; 50, pp. 22-30. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2018.1563454]
121. Li, F.; Zeng, Q.; Zhu, R.; Chu, S.; Xie, W.; Zhang, B.; Zhang, X. Application of the AMT Method to Gold Deposits: A Case Study in the Qinling Metallogenic Belt of North China Craton. Minerals; 2021; 11, 1200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min11111200]
122. Qi, P.; Yin, Y.; Jin, S.; Wei, W.; Xu, L.; Dong, H.; Huang, J. Three-Dimensional Audio-Magnetotelluric Imaging including Surface Topography of the Cimabanshuo Porphyry Copper Deposit, Tibet. Minerals; 2021; 11, 1424. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min11121424]
123. Pitiya, R.; Lu, M.; Chen, R.; Nong, G.; Chen, S.; Yao, H.; Shen, R.; Jiang, E. Audio Magnetotellurics Study of the Geoelectric Structure across the Zhugongtang Giant Lead–Zinc Deposit, NW Guizhou Province, China. Minerals; 2022; 12, 1552. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min12121552]
124. Legault, J.; Wilson, G.A.; Gribenko, A.V.; Zhdanov, M.S.; Zhao, S.; Kisk, K. An overview of the ZTEM and AirMt airborne electromagnetic systems: A case study from the Nebo–Babel Ni–Cu–PGE deposit, West Musgrave, Western Australia. Preview; 2012; 158, pp. 26-32. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/PVv2012n158p26]
125. Kita, J.; Noetzli, A.; Kusumaputri, N.; Lowe, M. Airborne electromagnetics in Pilbara manganese exploration—A case study. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2012; 2012, pp. 1-2. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2012ab254]
126. Reid, J.; Price, D.; Summerhayes, E. Geophysical case history of the Hollandaire Copper Deposit, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2013; 2013, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2013ab148]
127. Crowe, M.; Heinson, G.; Dhu, T. Magnetotellurics and Airborne Electromagnetics—A combined method for assessing basin structure and exploring for unconformity-related uranium. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2013; 2013, pp. 1-5. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2013ab225]
128. Wallace, Y.; Card, D.; Gates, K.; Cattach, M. Identification of massive sulphide targets using the Galvanic Source EM (GSEM) signal from a Sub-Audio Magnetic (SAM) survey at the Far South Project, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2015; 2015, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2015ab175]
129. Huizi, A.; Mulholland, I.; Belbin, W. The Camelwood and Musket Nickel deposits - Discovery of a new Nickel Sulphide camp in the North-eastern Goldfields of Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2015; 2015, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2015ab191]
130. Paggi, J.; Macklin, D. Discovery of the Eureka volcanogenic massive sulphide lens using down-hole electromagnetics. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2015; 2015, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2015ab176]
131. Thompson, A.D.; Flint, R.B. The discovery of the Artemis polymetallic deposit. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2016; 2016, pp. 1-6. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2016ab260]
132. Neroni, R.; Murray, R.; Kepert, D. Application of the airborne electromagnetic method for Banded Iron-Formation mapping in the Hamersley Province, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2016; 2016, pp. 1-8. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2016ab316]
133. Hine, K.; Macnae, J. Comparing induced polarization responses from airborne inductive and galvanic ground systems: Lewis Ponds, New South Wales. Geophysics; 2016; 81, pp. B179-B188. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0204.1]
134. Witherly, K.; Sattel, D. An assessment of Geotem, Falcon® and ZTEM surveys over the Nebo Babel deposit, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2018; 2018, pp. 1-7. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2018abW10_1E]
135. Eremenco, D.; Mortimer, R.; Mead, E. Delineating cobalt targets from a galvanic and inductive source Sub-Audio Magnetics (SAM) at the Carlow Castle project, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2019; 2019, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/22020586.2019.12072960]
136. Ren, X.; Macnae, J.; Hennessy, L. Three conductivity modelling algorithms and three 3D inversions of the Forrestania test site AEM anomaly. Explor. Geophys.; 2020; 51, pp. 14-24. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2018.1552072]
137. Tomlinson, A.; Maude, G. Using modern downhole EM to discover high-grade, narrow vein lodes in a historical gold field, Bellevue Gold Project, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2021; 2021, pp. 1-4.
138. Zhan, Y.; Duuring, P.; Dent, L.; Brett, J. Electromagnetic response of MVT sulfide deposits on the Lennard Shelf, Canning Basin. Proceedings of the Australasian Exploration Geoscience Conference (AEGC); Brisbane, Australia, 15–17 March 2023.
139. Burrows, D.; Smiarowski, A. Improving Nickel Exploration using a Purposefully Designed Airborne Electromagnetic System, with an Example from Julimar, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2023; 2023, pp. 1-4.
140. Prikhodko, A. Interpretation of electromagnetic multifrequency natural field data from Red Setter prospect (Paterson area, Western Australia). Proceedings of the ASEG DISCOVER Symposium (ASEG); Hobart, Australia, 15–18 October 2024.
141. Neroni, R.; Blundell, K.; Viezzoli, A. Interpreting airborne electromagnetic data unburdened from induced polarisation effects: An unconventional mineral discovery case study from the eastern Yilgarn region of Western Australia. Proceedings of the ASEG DISCOVER Symposium (ASEG); Hobart, Australia, 15–18 October 2024.
142. de los Ángeles García Juanatey, M.; Tryggvason, A.; Juhlin, C.; Bergström, U.; Hübert, J.; Pedersen, L.B. MT and reflection seismics in northwestern Skellefte Ore District, Sweden. Geophysics; 2013; 78, pp. B65-B76. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2012-0169.1]
143. Evrard, M.; Dumont, G.; Hermans, T.; Chouteau, M.; Francis, O.; Pirard, E.; Nguyen, F. Geophysical Investigation of the Pb–Zn Deposit of Lontzen–Poppelsberg, Belgium. Minerals; 2018; 8, 233. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min8060233]
144. Lahti, I.; Kontinen, A.; Nykänen, V. AMT survey in the Outokumpu ore belt, eastern Finland. Explor. Geophys.; 2019; 50, pp. 351-363. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2019.1606200]
145. Mörbe, W.; Yogeshwar, P.; Tezkan, B.; Hanstein, T. Deep exploration using long-offset transient electromagnetics: Interpretation of field data in time and frequency domain. Geophys. Prospect.; 2020; 68, pp. 1980-1998. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12957]
146. Núñez, P.; Watts, T.; Martin-Izard, A.; Arias, D.; Rubio, Á.; Cortés, F.; Díaz-Riopa, F. Airborne Electromagnetic Survey over the Touro Copper VMS World Class Deposit (NW Spain): Geological and Geophysical Correlation. Minerals; 2023; 13, 17. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min13010017]
147. Darnet, M.; Kim, B.; Védrine, S.; Deparis, J.; Bretaudeau, F.; Gance, J.; Vermeersch, F.; Truffert, C.; Autio, U.; Kamm, J. et al. Ground electrical and electromagnetic methods for deep mineral exploration—Results from the SEEMS DEEP project. Proceedings of the NSG 2024 5th Conference on Geophysics for Mineral Exploration and Mining; Helsinki, Finland, 8–12 September 2024.
148. Mörbe, W.; Yogeshwar, P.; Tezkan, B.; Kotowski, P.; Thiede, A.; Steuer, A.; Rochlitz, R.; Günther, T.; Brauch, K.; Becken, M. Large-scale 3D inversion of semi-airborne electromagnetic data-topography and induced polarization effects in a graphite exploration scenario. Geophysics; 2024; 89, pp. 1-54. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2023-0471.1]
149. Smith, R.S.; Koch, R.; Hodges, G.; Lemieux, J. A comparison of airborne electromagnetic data with ground resistivity data over the Midwest deposit in the Athabasca basin. Near Surf. Geophys.; 2011; 9, pp. 319-330. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2011002]
150. Pare, P.; Gribenko, A.V.; Cox, L.H.; Čuma, M.; Wilson, G.A.; Zhdanov, M.S.; Legault, J.; Smit, J.; Polome, L. 3D inversion of SPECTREM and ZTEM airborne electromagnetic data from the Pebble Cu–Au–Mo porphyry deposit, Alaska. Explor. Geophys.; 2012; 43, pp. 104-115. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG11044]
151. Legault, J.M.; Zhao, S.; Zhao, S. ZTEM airborne AFMAG survey results over low sulphidation epithermal gold-silver vein systems at Gold Springs, south eastern Nevada. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2012; 2012, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2012ab318]
152. Kowalczyk, P.L.; van Kooten, P.B.M. ZTEM data inversion and interpretation using the UBC-GIF MTinv3D code: A case history at the Silver Queen project, British Columbia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2012; 2012, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2012ab344]
153. Orta, M.; Legault, J.M.; Prikhodko, A.; Plastow, G.; Zhao, S.; Ulansky, C. Passive and active helicopter EM survey comparisons over 501 Project Cu- Zn volcanogenic massive sulphide at McFauld’s Lake, northern Ontario. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2013; 2013, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2013ab183]
154. Schijns, H.; Grant, T.; Toole, T. The Hood 10 VHMS deposit of Nunavut, Canada: A case history. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2013; 2013, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2013ab187]
155. Gaucher, F.; Smith, R. Exploring for copper-gold deposits with time-domain electromagnetics in the Chapais-Chibougamau mining camp: Case history of a challenging variable environment. Proceedings of the 2016 SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting; Dallas, TX, USA, 16–21 October 2016; pp. 2228-2232.
156. Legault, J.M.; Latrous, A.; Zhao, S.; Bournas, N.; Plastow, G.C.; Xue, G.G. Helicopter AFMAG (ZTEM) EM and magnetic results over sedimentary exhalative (SEDEX) lead-zinc deposits at Howard’s Pass in Selwyn Basin, Yukon. Explor. Geophys.; 2016; 47, pp. 170-178. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG15088]
157. Hodges, G.; Chen, T.; van Buren, R. HELITEM detects the Lalor VMS deposit. Explor. Geophys.; 2016; 47, pp. 285-289. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG16006]
158. Le, C.V.A.; Harris, B.D.; Pethick, A.M.; Takam Takoumag, E.M.; Howe, B. Semiautomatic and Automatic Cooperative Inversion of Seismic and Magnetotelluric Data. Surv. Geophys.; 2016; 37, pp. 845-896. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10712-016-9377-z]
159. Macnae, J. Fitting superparamagnetic and distributed Cole-Cole parameters to airborne electromagnetic data: A case history from Quebec. Geophysics; 2016; 81, pp. B211-B220. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0119.1]
160. Hübert, J.; Lee, B.M.; Liu, L.; Unsworth, M.J.; Richards, J.P.; Abbassi, B.; Cheng, L.Z.; Oldenburg, D.W.; Legault, J.M.; Rebagliati, M. Three-dimensional imaging of a Ag-Au-rich epithermal system in BritishColumbia, Canada, using airborne z-axis tipper electromagneticand ground-based magnetotelluric data. Geophysics; 2016; 81, pp. B1-B12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2015-0230.1]
161. Lee, B.M.; Unsworth, M.J.; Hübert, J.; Richards, J.P.; Legault, J.M. 3D joint inversion of magnetotelluric and airborne tipper data: A case study from the Morrison porphyry Cu–Au–Mo deposit, British Columbia, Canada. Geophys. Prospect.; 2017; 66, pp. 397-421. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12554]
162. Walker, S.E.; Campbell, C.; Legault, J.M.; Izarra, C.; Kwan, K.; Plastow, G.; Whiting, B.; Van Egmond, R. Airborne Geophysics over the Dolly Varden VMS and Low Sulphidation Epithermal Silver Deposits, Northwestern BC, Canada. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2018; 2018, pp. 1-5. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2018abW8_4E]
163. Bingham, D.; Legault, J.M. Geophysics of the Patterson Lake South Uranium Deposit, northwestern Saskatchewan. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2018; 2018, pp. 1-6. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2018abW10_3E]
164. Lu, X.; Farquharson, C.; Miehé, J.-M.; Harrison, G.; Ledru, P. Computer modeling of electromagnetic data for mineral exploration: Application to uranium exploration in the Athabasca Basin. Lead. Edge; 2021; 40, pp. 139a1-139a11. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/tle40020139a1.1]
165. Lu, X.; Farquharson, C.G.; Miehé, J.-M.; Harrison,. 3D electromagnetic modeling of graphitic faults in the Athabasca Basin using a finite-volume time-domain approach with unstructured grids. Geophysics; 2021; 86, pp. B349-B367. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2020-0657.1]
166. Smith, R.S.; Lee, T.J. Multiple-order moments of the transient electromagnetic response of a one-dimensional earth with finite conductance—The Gaussian variation applied to a field example. Explor. Geophys.; 2022; 53, pp. 262-274. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2021.1925105]
167. Lee, T.J.; Smith, R.S. Multiple-order moments of the transient electromagnetic response of a one-dimensional earth with finite conductance–theory. Explor. Geophys.; 2021; 52, pp. 1-15. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2020.1760715]
168. Mir, R.; Fullagar, P.; Darijani, M.; Smith, R.; Scott, S.; Ross, M.; Shamsipour, P.; Chouteau, M.; Ansdell, K.; Gouiza, M. Forward modeling and 3D inversion of electromagnetic data collected over the McArthur River uranium deposit in the Athabasca Basin, Canada. Geophysics; 2022; 87, pp. B129-B143. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2021-0199.1]
169. La Terra, E.F.; Menezes, P.T.L. Audiomagnetotelluric 3D imaging of the Regis kimberlite pipe, Minas Gerais, Brazil. J. Appl. Geophys.; 2012; 77, pp. 30-38. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.11.010]
170. McMillan, M.S.; Oldenburg, D.W. Cooperative constrained inversion of multiple electromagnetic data sets. Geophysics; 2014; 79, pp. B173-B185. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0029.1]
171. Couto Junior, M.A.; Fiandaca, G.; Maurya, P.K.; Christiansen, A.V.; Porsani, J.L.; Auken, E. AEMIP robust inversion using maximum phase angle Cole–Cole model re-parameterisation applied for HTEM survey over Lamego gold mine, Quadrilátero Ferrífero, MG, Brazil. Explor. Geophys.; 2020; 51, pp. 170-183. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2019.1682458]
172. Couston, G.; Fitzhardinge, R.; Osborne, G.; Adamson, M. EM success in the Carajas—Geophysical results of the Jaguar Nickel Deposit, Brazil. Proceedings of the Australasian Exploration Geoscience Conference (AEGC); Brisbane, Australia, 15–17 March 2023.
173. Viezzoli, A.; Kaminski, V. Airborne IP: Examples from the Mount Milligan deposit, Canada, and the Amakinskaya kimberlite pipe, Russia. Explor. Geophys.; 2016; 47, pp. 269-278. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG16015]
174. Kaminski, V.; Viezzoli, A. Modeling induced polarization effects in helicopter time-domain electromagnetic data: Field case studies. Geophysics; 2017; 82, pp. B49-B61. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0103.1]
175. Ghari, H.A.; Voge, M.; Bastani, M.; Pfaffhuber, A.A.; Oskooi, B. Comparing resistivity models from 2D and 1D inversion of frequency domain HEM data over rough terrains: Cases study from Iran and Norway. Explor. Geophys.; 2020; 51, pp. 45-65. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2019.1588068]
176. Prikhodko, A.; Bagrianski, A.; Wilson, R.; Belyakov, S.; Esimkhanova, N. Detecting and recovering critical mineral resource systems using broadband total-field airborne natural source audio frequency magnetotellurics measurements. Geophysics; 2024; 89, pp. WB13-WB23. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2023-0224.1]
177. Thiede, A.; Schiffler, M.; Junge, A.; Becken, M. Multivariate processing of airborne natural source EM data—Application to field data from gobabis (Namibia). Geophys. J. Int.; 2024; 238, pp. 573-589. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggae172]
178. Mohanty, W.K.; Mandal, A.; Sharma, S.P.; Gupta, S.; Misra, S. Integrated geological and geophysical studies for delineation of chromite deposits: A case study from Tangarparha, Orissa, India. Geophysics; 2011; 76, pp. B173-B185. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2010-0255.1]
179. Hoschke, T. Geophysics of the Elang Cu-Au porphyry deposit, Indonesia, and comparison with other Cu-Au porphyry systems. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2012; 2012, pp. 1-3. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2012ab178]
180. Legault, J.M.; Izarra, C.; Zhao, S.; Saadawi, E.M. Helicopter AFMAG (ZTEM) Survey Results over the Ad Duwayhi intrusion related gold deposit (IRGD) in the Western Arabian Shield, KSA. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2013; 2013, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2013ab182]
181. Markandeyulu, A.; Chaturvedi, A.K.; Raju, B.V.S.N.; Parihar, P.S.; Miller, R.; Gooch, G. Application of high resolution airborne geophysical data in geological modelling of Mohar Cauldron Complex, Bundelkhand Massif, central India: Implications for uranium exploration. Explor. Geophys.; 2014; 45, pp. 134-146. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG12053]
182. Legault, J.M.; Izarra, C.; Prikhodko, A.; Zhao, S.; Saadawi, E.M. Helicopter EM (ZTEM–VTEM) survey results over the Nuqrah copper–lead–zinc–gold SEDEX massive sulphide deposit in the Western Arabian Shield, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Explor. Geophys.; 2015; 46, pp. 36-48. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG14028]
183. Xu, S.; Xu, F.; Hu, X.; Zhu, Q.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, S. Electromagnetic characterization of epithermal gold deposits: A case study from the Tuoniuhe gold deposit, Northeast China. Geophysics; 2020; 85, pp. B49-B62. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0876.1]
184. Chen, J.; Li, Z.; Tian, B.; Chen, X.; Zheng, J.; Zhang, C.; Zhao, W.; Zhang, F. Using the CSAMT method to predict deep mineralisation of copper and molybdenum: A case study of the Zhongxingtun area in Inner Mongolia, China. Explor. Geophys.; 2020; 51, pp. 203-213. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2019.1669441]
185. Xu, L.; Yin, Y.; Jin, S.; Wei, W.; Hao, Z.; Li, X.; Liu, H.; Li, H. CSAMT constraints on the metallogenic mechanism of the Zhaishang gold deposit, West Qinling, China. Explor. Geophys.; 2022; 53, pp. 359-371. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2021.1975496]
186. Fu, J.; Jia, S.; Wang, E. Combined Magnetic, Transient Electromagnetic, and Magnetotelluric Methods to Detect a BIF-Type Concealed Iron Ore Body: A Case Study in Gongchangling Iron Ore Concentration Area, Southern Liaoning Province, China. Minerals; 2020; 10, 1044. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min10121044]
187. An, S.; Zhang, Z.; Zhou, K.; Wang, J. Subsurface structures of the Xiaorequanzi deposit, NW China: New insights from gravity, magnetic and electromagnetic data. Geophys. Prospect.; 2021; 69, pp. 434-447.
188. Horo, D.; Pal, S.K.; Singh, S.; Biswas, A. New Insights into the Gold Mineralization in the Babaikundi–Birgaon Axis, North Singhbhum Mobile Belt, Eastern Indian Shield Using Magnetic, Very Low-Frequency Electromagnetic (VLF-EM), and Self-Potential Data. Minerals; 2023; 13, 1289. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min13101289]
189. Lingaswamy, J.; Thirupathi, K.; Mathur, R.R.; Mukherjee, A. Ground Magnetic and Very Low Frequency Electromagnetic Surveys to Locate Probable Kimberlites in Panna Diamond Belt, Madhya Pradesh, India. Int. J. Multidiscip. Res.; 2024; 6, pp. 1-17.
190. Witherly, K.; Mackee, G. Geophysical Responses over the Cannington Ag-Zn-Pb Deposit-Queensland. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2015; 2015, pp. 1-5. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2015ab179]
191. Reid, J.; Farrell, J.; Pears, G.; Jaunzems, A.; Enright, M.; Haederle, M. Integrated Geological and Geophysical Interpretation for the Koodaideri Detrital Iron Deposits, Fortescue Valley, Western Australia. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2016; 2016, pp. 1-9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2016ab273]
192. Jones, H.; Lackie, M.; Smith, M.; Nimalsiri, T. Geophysical Signature of the Southern Gurubang Base Metal Occurrence in South Eastern NSW. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2018; 2018, pp. 1-8. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2018abP082]
193. Hoschke, T.; Kim Frankcombe, K. Geophysical response of alteration and mineralisation in the WafiGolpu porphyry system, Papua New Guinea. Proceedings of the ASEG DISCOVER Symposium (ASEG); Hobart, Australia, 15–18 October 2024.
194. Persson, L.; Lundin, I.A.; Pedersen, L.B.; Claeson, D. Combined magnetic, electromagnetic and resistivity study over a highly conductive formation in Orrivaara, Northern Sweden. Geophys. Prospect.; 2011; 59, pp. 1155-1163. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.00998.x]
195. Le, C.V.A.; Harris, B.D.; Pethick, A.M. Magnetotelluric Inversion, Carbonaceous Phyllites, and an Ore Zone: Kevitsa, Finland. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2016; 1, pp. 1-5. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2016ab241]
196. Horrocks, T.; Holden, E.-J.; Wedge, D.; Wijns, C. A nonparametric boundary detection technique applied to 3D inverted surveys of the Kevitsa Ni-Cu-PGE deposit. Geophysics; 2018; 83, pp. IM1-IM13. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2017-0085.1]
197. Fraser, S.J.; Wilson, G.A.; Cox, L.H.; Čuma, M.; Zhdanov, M.S.; Vallée, M.A. Self-organizing maps for pseudo-lithological classification of 3D airborne electromagnetic, gravity gradiometry and magnetic inversions. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2012; 2012, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2012ab086]
198. Shah, A.K.; Bedrosian, P.A.; Anderson, E.D.; Kelley, K.D.; Lang, J. Integrated geophysical imaging of a concealed mineral deposit: A case study of the world-class Pebble porphyry deposit in southwestern Alaska. Geophysics; 2013; 78, pp. B317-B328. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2013-0046.1]
199. Legault, J.M.; Plastow, G.; Zhao, S.; Bournas, N.; Prikhodko, A.; Orta, M. ZTEM and VTEM airborne EM and magnetic results over the Lalor copper-gold volcanogenic massive sulfide deposit region, near Snow Lake, Manitoba. Interpretation; 2015; 3, pp. SL83-SL94. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2014-0245.1]
200. Yang, D.; Oldenburg, D.W. 3D inversion of total magnetic intensity data for time-domain EM at the Lalor massive sulfide deposit. Explor. Geophys.; 2017; 48, pp. 110-123. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG15070]
201. Yang, D.; Fournier, D.; Kang, S.; Oldenburg, D.W. Deep mineral exploration using multi-scale electromagnetic geophysics: The Lalor massive sulfide deposit case study. Can. J. Earth Sci.; 2018; 56, pp. 544-555. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2018-0069]
202. Hayward, N.; Corriveau, L.; Craven, J.A.; Enkin, R.J. Geophysical Signature of the NICO Au-Co-Bi-Cu Deposit and Its Iron Oxide-Alkali Alteration System, Northwest Territories, Canada. Econ. Geol.; 2016; 111, pp. 2087-2109. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2113/econgeo.111.8.2087]
203. Peacock, J.R.; Denton, K.M.; Ponce, D.A. Magnetotelluric Imaging of a Carbonatite Terrane in the Southeast Mojave Desert, California and Nevada. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2016; 2016, pp. 1-5. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2016ab148]
204. Kaminski, V.; Di Massa, D.; Viezzoli, A. Joint inversions of two VTEM surveys using quasi-3D TDEM and 3D magnetic inversion algorithms. Explor. Geophys.; 2016; 47, pp. 260-268. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG16014]
205. Devriese, S.G.R.; Davis, K.; Oldenburg, D.W. Inversion of airborne geophysics over the DO-27/DO-18 kimberlites—Part 1: Potential fields. Interpretation; 2017; 5, pp. T299-T311. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2016-0142.1]
206. Fournier, D.; Kang, S.; McMillan, M.S.; Oldenburg, D.W. Inversion of airborne geophysics over the DO-27/DO-18 kimberlites—Part 2: Electromagnetics. Interpretation; 2017; 5, pp. T313-T325. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2016-0140.1]
207. Kang, S.; Fournier, D.; Oldenburg, D.W. Inversion of airborne geophysics over the DO-27/DO-18 kimberlites—Part 3: Induced polarization. Interpretation; 2017; 5, pp. T327-T340. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2016-0141.1]
208. Mir, R.; Perrouty, S.; Astic, T.; Bérubé, C.L.; Smith, R.S. Structural complexity inferred from anisotropic resistivity: Example from airborne EM and compilation of historical resistivity/induced polarization data from the gold-rich Canadian Malartic district, Québec, Canada. Geophysics; 2019; 84, pp. B153-B167. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0444.1]
209. Kuhn, S.; Cracknell, M.J.; Reading, A.M.; Sykora, S. Identification of intrusive lithologies in volcanogenic terrains in British Columbia by machine learning using random forests: The value of using a soft classifier. Geophysics; 2020; 85, pp. B249-B258. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2019-0461.1]
210. Darijani, M.; Farquharson, C.G. Inversion of magnetic and frequency-domain electromagnetic data for investigating lithologies associated with gold mineralization in the Canadian Malartic area, Québec, Canada. Can. J. Earth Sci.; 2021; 58, pp. 413-432. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2020-0092]
211. Finn, C.A.; Zientek, M.; Bloss, B.R.; Parks, H.; Modroo, J. Electromagnetic and magnetic imaging of the Stillwater Complex, Montana, USA. Explor. Geophys.; 2023; 54, pp. 553-570. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2023.2214166]
212. Legault, J.M.; Kwan, K.; Greig, J.; Webster, E.; Hanki, M. Targeting epithermal Au-Ag using helicopter TDEM, magnetic, and radiometric data at Lawyers Project, North-Central BC, Canada. Proceedings of the 8th International Airborne Electromagnetics Workshop (AEM2023); Fitzroy Island, Australia, 4–7 September 2023.
213. Legault, J.M.; Kwan, K.; Ebert, S. ZTEM Airborne Natural Field EM-Magnetics and Mineral Targeting Results over the Berg Porphyry Copper Project, near Houston, British Columbia. Proceedings of the 8th International Airborne Electromagnetics Workshop (AEM2023); Fitzroy Island, Australia, 4–7 September 2023.
214. Legault, J.M.; Niemi, J.; Brett, J.; Zhao, S.; Han, Z.; Plastow, G. Passive airborne EM and Ground IP\Resistivity results over the Romero intermediate sulphidation epithermal gold deposits, Dominican Republic. Explor. Geophys.; 2016; 47, pp. 191-200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG15089]
215. Kwan, K.; Plastow, G.; Prikhodko, A.; Kapetas, J.; Legault, J.M.; Druecker, M. VTEM airborne EM, aeromagnetic and gamma-ray spectrometric data over the Cerro Quema high sulphidation epithermal gold deposits, Panama. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2015; 2015, pp. 1-4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2015ab309]
216. Legault, J.M.; Wijns, C.; Izarra, C.; Plastow, G. The Balboa ZTEM Cu-Mo-Au porphyry discovery at Cobre Panama. ASEG Ext. Abstr.; 2016; 2016, pp. 1-6.
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Moussaoui, Mouhamed; Khan, Khorram