A Fast Approach to Magnetic Equivalent Source Processing Using

an Adaptive Quadtree Mesh Discretization

Kristofer Davis

Yaoguo Li

Center for Gravity, Electrical and Magnetic Studies

Dept. of Geophysics, Colorado School of Mines
1500 Illinois Street
Golden, CO 80401 USA
kdavis@mines.edu

Center for Gravity, Electrical and Magnetic Studies

Dept. of Geophysics, Colorado School of Mines
1500 Illinois Street
Golden, CO 80401 USA
ygli@mines.edu

SUMMARY
The use of equivalent source processing on magnetic
datasets is important for the regular gridding and
denoising of data before any other processing can occur.
The processing technique is setup as an inverse problem
and solved for susceptibilities to reproduce the observed
data. The drawback to the inverse problem is
computation cost and overall speed for large-scale
problems. Since aeromagnetics has become common in
exploration, it is rare that the datasets acquired are small
in data volume or space, and can be handled rapidly on a
single workstation. One way to minimize the
computational cost is to reduce the number of model
parameters. We present an equivalent source processing
technique that minimizes the number of cells in the
model domain via an adaptive quadtree mesh
discretization. The mesh remains coarse where no
significant anomalies are present, yet fines on the edges
of observed anomalies. The transition from the fine to
coarse mesh grid is based on the total-gradient of the
dataset, placing smaller cells on the edges of the anomaly
where the susceptibilities have the greatest variation
spatially. We show that the algorithm can perform over
four times as fast as traditional equivalent source
processing with a regular cell mesh yet preserves the
same accuracy. In this paper, we present a synthetic
example for proof of concept.

achieve comparable processing results only using 216 cells in

the source layer. We continue by presenting the inversion
methodology of the equivalent source problem, the adaptive
quadtree mesh design, and show a synthetic example.

EQUIVALENT SOURCE PROCESSING

The equivalent source processing technique uses a thin layer
of source cells below the data to recreate the observed data.
Rather than pure interpolation, this method uses the physics
based on a susceptibility distribution. In theory, the vertical
cell width using equivalent sources is infinitely small, but in
practice the vertical cell width only needs to be a small
fraction of the cell width in the horizontal directions. The
susceptibilities are solved for via inversion using Tikhonov
regularization. Accurately representing the behaviour of the
magnetic field, the sources can then be forward modelled to
observation locations. This allows for the even gridding of
datasets. The reproduced data is also denoised of higher
frequencies because of this process. Finally, the model can be
easily extended and multiple datasets can be merged in order
to create a larger, single dataset that is easier to process and
interpret.
Magnetic data can be calculated by knowing the geometry and
physics of the source cells with relation to the observation
locations and known susceptibilities. The result is a linear
process described by

r r
G = d

(1)

Key words: magnetics, quadtree, equivalent sources.

INTRODUCTION
Equivalent sources are a layer of fictitious sources that are
calculated to represent the observed magnetic total-field. This
processing technique can allow for a regularly gridded dataset,
based on physics, not minimum curvature, for most magnetic
datasets. The layer is comprised of infinitely thin cells with a
continuous, finite susceptibility within each cell that can
reproduce the observed data. The linear problem is set up to
be solved through inverse theory. The drawback to the inverse
problem is computation cost and overall speed for large-scale
problems. One way to minimize this cost is to reduce the
number of model parameters (Ascher and Haber, 2001). We
introduce an adaptive Quadtree mesh design that is chosen
based on the total-gradient of the observed magnetic field to
decrease the cost of inversion. In our synthetic example,
equivalent source processing is performed using 625 cells. We
ASEG 2007 Perth, Western Australia

where G is the sensitivity matrix, d is the created data, and is

the susceptibilities of the model. We can forward model data
by simple matrix-vector multiplication or we can solve for the
sources by using linear inverse theory in order to
appropriately solve for a layer of susceptibilities in order to
reproduce the observed data.

INVERSION METHODOLOGY
The susceptibility can be solved for by minimizing a global
objective function, . The optimal solution is found when
minimizing such that

min = d + m

(2)

when d, the data misfit, is equal to d*, the optimal data

misfit. The optimal data misfit is the number of data points if
the data has Gaussian errors and thus follows a 2 distribution,

Equivalent sources using quadtree discretization

Davis and Li

an assumption that works in most cases. In order to find the

optimal data misfit, a Tikhonov parameter, , is chosen based
on the optimal model weighting. The model objective
function, m, contains the information of the model and linear
equation describing the inverse problem (Li and Oldenburg,
1999). The data misfit is given by

d = Wd (d pre d obs )

(3)

and Wd is a weighting matrix that contains the inverse of the

standard deviation for each respective datum along its
diagonal, normalizing the data vector by the respective errors.
The model objective function is given by

m = Wm

(4)

for a calculated and model weighting matrix, Wm. In 3D

inversion, the model weighting includes the z-direction and
depth weighting. Due to having only one layer, these
quantities are not factored into the equivalent source. The
minimization of the global objective function can now be
written

r
r
2
r
= Wd (d pre d obs ) + Wm

(5)

To minimize the global objective function, the linear

conjugate gradient (CG) method is used after finding the
proper via Tikhonov regularization.
The Tikhonov regularization (or trade-off) parameter
(Tikhonov and Arsenin, 1977) is important in the optimization
process. The regularization parameter is chosen so the optimal
solution is neither over-smoothing nor under-smoothing the
data (i.e. fitting the noise or the signal). Traditionally,
multiple regularization parameters are chosen and is
minimized for each chosen parameter. An L-curve is chosen
to find the proper regularization parameter; one that
minimizes the data noise within the errors. The point that
represents the highest curvature is chosen and the data misfit
and model objective function for the respective point is where
the trade-off parameter should be chosen on the L-curve. In
order to find this point, the second derivatives of the L-curve
are calculated and the point of highest curvature, c, is given by

c( ) =

d
m
m
d

[( ) ( ) ]

2 3/ 2

(6)

such that

= ln( )

d
d

, and

= ln( )

m
m

(7a; 7b)

Smoothing of the data and natural de-noising occurs when

choosing the trade-off parameter at the point of highest
curvature.

QUADTREE DISCRETIZATION
The quadtree mesh design is one that places larger cells where
no or little signal is present and smaller cells to increase
ASEG 2007 Perth, Western Australia

resolution where sources are located. The mesh starts as two

cells and if one of the cells has a property value higher than a
given threshold, it is split in half. This process continues until
all of the cells are within the property threshold. This may
mean if a source is large enough, cells within the source may
be larger than the edges of the source. We use the totalgradient to determine where edges of anomalies are in order to
discretize the cells to a higher resolution.
The quadtree mesh discretization has been used mostly in
geophysics in remote sensing applications (e.g. Gerstner,
1999). The quadtree method is useful in particular in large
scale problems by minimizing the number of cells the model
mesh contains. For some problems such as DC resistivity, the
quadtree structure has a maximum of two neighboring cells
(Eso and Oldenburg, 2007); however, I allow up to four
neighboring cells as the traditional quadtree structure allows.
The traditional quadtree must have 2n maximum number of
cells in both the easting and the northing as well. We follow
this procedure for ease of calculating the total-gradient, but
then discard cells outside the data area before formulation of
the sensitivity matrix.
Since the even gridding of the total-gradient is required, this
padding does not hinder the overall calculation speed. The
total-gradient is also padded to 2n and linearly tapered as to
not create artifacts on the edge of the dataset and calculated in
the Fourier domain for efficiency. A threshold precent of the
largest anomaly is chosen for the coarse to fine cell transition.
The mesh starts with two cells total, and then the cells split in
an iterative process depending on the total-gradient
calculation. The total-gradient changes the most rapidly on the
edges of sources, and therefore the cells are split where these
changes occur beyond some given threshold. The optimum
threshold for the gradient in order to split cells is most likely
problem dependent; however, this is an area of future research
and may be problem dependent. For the synthetic example a
threshold of 7% of the maximum amplitude of the totalgradient was used. After the mesh discretization occurs, the
mesh is reduced back to where the data is present and the
resulting cells on the edge are kept. This creates a jagged
mesh, but still covers the data area. The sensitivity matrix is
calculated based on the nodal points of the quadtree mesh and
the processing of the data is carried out just as it would with a
regular mesh.

SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE
In order to test the algorithm, a synthetic example is created.
The generated dikes are horizontal in dip with one striking 45
and one striking in the east direction. Flight lines are flown
at 30 meters of elevation, 100 meters apart and the total-field
magnetic response was calculated. The inducing field is
52,000 nT in strength at an inclination of 65 and a
declination of 25. White Gaussian noise is added to each data
set and the total-field data is shown in Figure 1 using
minimum curvature as the plotting tool. On all of the figures,
the white dots indicated where data was observed or
calculated. A traditional equivalent source (ES) technique is
used and the results are shown in Figure 2. The quadtree mesh
equivalent source technique is also performed and the results
are in Figure 3. Each ES result was forward modelled at an
even grid interval of 10 meters.

Equivalent sources using quadtree discretization

Davis and Li

The two equivalent source (ES) results are comparable, but

the traditional ES is slower by a factor of four. Figure 4 shows
compared difference in meshes. The quadtree ES uses 216
mesh cells to the 625 by the traditional method. By differing
the number of cells (i.e. number of model parameters) in a
linear problem, the computational cost could be linear. This is
tested by running both the traditional and quadtree equivalent
source programs and calculating an L-curve 100 times,
ranging from 3 values to 1000 values on the curve. The results
show (Figure 5) that by changing the number of model
parameters, the computational time decreases linearly.
Since the quadtree has larger cells, the anomaly wavelengths
of theses cells are broader and therefore the ES needs smaller
model weighting than the traditional technique. For a
comparison of the L-curves, see Figure 6.
Figure 3.
Calculated data based on the quadtree
equivalent source algorithm.

Figure 1. Observed data with noise after minimum

curvature gridding.

Figure 5. The ratio of time between quadtree and normal

meshes for the synthetic dataset. The average is 5.2 times
faster.

DISCUSSION
The total-gradient is calculated in the Fourier domain by
multiplication. The threshold of the total-gradient in order to
define the quadtree mesh is problem and user dependent. This
interpretation may lead to either slower or faster results, but
based on the inverse theory, will fit the data as well as it can
with the user defined model parameters. The results for the
quadtree and normal mesh equivalent source will differ
because both are separate inversions. This is reaffirmed in
Figure 6 with the two different Tikhonov curves.

CONCLUSIONS

Figure 2.
Calculated data based on a traditional
equivalent source algorithm.

ASEG 2007 Perth, Western Australia

The equivalent source methodology of the adaptive quadtree

method remains the same as the traditional methodology. The
problem is linear and is solved by minimizing a global
objective function through Tikhonov regularization and the
linear conjugate gradient method. By reducing the number of
cells, the inversion cuts a significant amount of computation
cost as compared to the traditional equivalent source
technique. The threshold to split a cell is based on the totalgradient calculation performed in the Fourier domain. The
synthetic example has shown that the quadtree technique
results are comparable to the traditional equivalent source, but
faster.

Equivalent sources using quadtree discretization

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Dave Hale and Robert Eso for
helpful discussions involving mesh generation. We would also
like to thank the members of CGEM for their support as well
as the companies of Gravity and Magnetics Research
Consortium (GMRC) who funded this project.
REFERENCES
Ascher, U. M., and Haber, E., 2001, Grid refinement and
scaling for distributed parameter estimation problems: Inverse
Problems, 17, pp. 517-590.
Eso, R., and Oldenburg, D., 2007, Efficient 2.5D resistivity
modeling using a quadtree discretization: SAGEEP
Proceedings, 20, pp. X-(X+9).

Davis and Li

Hansen, P. C., The L-curve and its use in the numerical

treatment of inverse problems, in Computational Inverse
Problems in Electrocardiology, P. Johnston (Ed.), Advances in
Computation Bioengineering, 4, WIT Press, Southampton,
2000, pp.119-142.
Li, Y., and Oldenburg, D., 1996, 3-D inversion of magnetic
data: Geophysics, 61, pp. 394408.
Nabighian, M. N., 1972, The analytic signal of twodimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal cross-section: its
properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation:
Geophysics, 37, pp. 507-517.
Tikhonov, A. N., and Arsenin, V. Y., 1977, Solution of Illposed Problems, Winston, Washington, D.C.

Gerstner, T., 1999, Adaptive hierarchical methods for

landscape representation and analysis: Lecture Notes in Earth
Sciences, Berlin Springer Verlag, 78, pp. 75-92.

Figure 4. A comparison of the normal mesh and quadtree mesh for equivalent source processing.

Figure 6. A comparison of L-curves created by both the quadtree and normal equivalent source methods.
ASEG 2007 Perth, Western Australia