Comparative study between filtering and inversion of VLF-EM profile data

This paper discusses the practical use of filtering and inversion in VLF-EM data processing and interpretation. The advantages and disadvantages of both mentioned techniques were outlined to avoid the misleading interpretation of such data in some case studies. Much concern is taken to show the interval distance effect upon the correct depth identification of the anomalous body by either inversion or filtering. The methodology of the study is going through proposing an initial model, generating the synthetic VLF-EM data of the model by means of forward modeling, filtering (Karous–Hjelt filter) and inversion (Inv2DVLF software) of the synthetic data and comparing between the results of both methods and the initial model. The study reached to (1) Karous–Hjelt filter provides misleading depths for his limited depth of resolution and cannot provide estimates of deep targets if the profile is too small, whereas inversion provides exact results, particularly in case of shallow anomalous target; (2) crossover between in-phase and out-of-phase data could resulted from a small shallow conductive target or a large deep one; (3) selection of a reasonable environmental resistivity has an important impact on the inversion process; and (4) the numerical reflection resulted during VLF-EM data inversion could lead to an erroneous interpretation.