{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019656019656019656, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.422712933753943, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Modeling and Inversion of Airborne and Semi-Airborne Transient Electromagnetic Data with Inexact Transmitter and Receiver Geometries

Airborne and semi-airborne transient electromagnetic (TEM) surveys have high efficiency but may suffer from systematic errors due to the inexact shape, position, and orientation of the transmitter and receiver, which can deviate from the nominal design because of complex terrain, platform instability, or external forces. Without considering actual survey geometry, modeling and inversion can bias the interpretation of results. We develop a universal approach to layered earth capable of modeling arbitrarily complex transmitter and receiver geometry used in airborne and semi-airborne surveys. Our algorithm decomposes an airborne loop or grounded wire source to a set of x-, y-, or z-oriented electric dipoles. An arbitrarily oriented receiver coil is simulated by projecting three-component data to the actual direction of receiving. In airborne TEM, the transmitter loop and receiver coil are often bound together on a rigid frame and tilt during the flight. Our simulations and synthetic inversion show that such a tilt may reduce responses relative to the data obtained with the nominal geometry; an inversion without considering the tilt can underestimate near-surface conductivity. In semi-airborne TEM, the transmitter wire on the surface can be crooked, and the airborne receiver coil can also tilt. Our modeling shows that the simulated data can change significantly if the actual transmitter and receiver geometry does not exactly follow the nominal survey design; if not appropriately accounted for, such an error may distort the recovered conductivity model. Finally, the benefit of our algorithm is demonstrated by an airborne TEM field data inversion of groundwater problems with the tilt angle of the transmitter–receiver frame accurately modeled. Our work provides a tool for improving the resolution of airborne and semi-airborne TEM in near-surface conductivity characterization.