Jump to content

Anyone Using Artificial Intelligence With Their Gold Detectors?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, phrunt said:

Yea, I don't think I've ever used tracking on the 4500, but in saying that I'm the person least likely to need to use it, I was always on fixed and manual is my go-to on the 7000.  The more detector manufacturers can improve ground balance the better depth the users will get, I think people in hotter soils would get a surprise the depth difference between having any ground balance and ground balance disabled.  For example, the GPX 5000 with GB completely turned off, not fixed, off completely gives so much more depth than the same detector with Ground balance enabled and balanced in mild soils where the detector gets no reaction from the soil with it either on or off.    The QED was the same, in any mode other than Mode 11 (GB Disabled) in mild soils even with a perfectly balanced detector the depth is killed just by enabling the ground balance circuit.  I guess in a way Geosense is working towards this, I would still like a way to disable it on the 6000 just to see how it works for me.

In some of my prospecting areas I can run both the QED and GPX 4500/5000 with ground balance completely disabled and they remained perfectly balanced, no reaction from the ground at all, the down side is by disabling it the hot rocks really come alive so the area has to be selected carefully to take advantage of it.

The better manufacturers can improve the detectors ground balance the better the depth will be and if they can use some sort of AI technology to do this or just faster processing or whatever it will be the next big improvement in PI's.  I always thought that if I used ground balance and balanced the detector I'd get the same depth as if I had ground balance turned off entirely in very mild soil, and this is simply not correct.    My mild soils are the perfect example of this as even though I can run with no ground balance at all, just by enabling it I am hindering depth.

Exactly. Your experiencing running with GB off illustrates how much detecting depth depends on the ground handling. 
 

Think I’d still rather have our Aussie sized nuggets and hotter ground than your mild soils and fine gold 😅 hope you can make it over here some time for a prospecting adventure and smash some personal bests!

  • Haha 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I always use semi auto GB, manual GB only when homing in on a target, but not all the times (usually only to avoid tracking out faint targets). IMO the GPZ ground processing algorithms are unmatched by any other detector that I have used (including 6000), but it will require a proper GB for it to work.

Considering how AI has improved the technology in so many technology sectors, I would not be surprised if it would eventually also be used for gold detectors. There ought to be a way to differentiate lead and iron from gold via decay patterns. Just put Watson on it. But please without adding 2000 lbs to the detector.

GC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ben201000 said:

Thanks for the paper! 

Thank you all of that post. There was so much in it. I'm new to everything to do with detecting so all of it was extremely helpful. What are your ideas on other methods of acquiring the signal? Is multi frequency analysis something that could be used?

I was thinking an approach to this could be to use a similar approach to photogrammetry or biometrics. Only using image and no location data. The phone/drone/AR glasses would map key points of each image and an AI detects the location of the coil against the image.

I'm doubtful if this could work right now, but I 100% think it will sometime in the future. 

In regards to you mentioning that induction is maxed out, are there any new alternatives? Maybe technologies that pick up so much that they're practically impossible to turn into a human interpretable audio signal, but could all be feed into some kind of neural network? Is multifrequency something in this direction? 

Here's a moderately technical paper from Minelab (who, at this time, makes the best pulse induction prospecting detectors): https://www.minelab.com/__files/f/11043/KBA_METAL_DETECTOR_BASICS_&_THEORY.pdf

More basics (see Multi Period Fast, Multi Period Sensing, Smart Electronic Timing Alignment, Zero Voltage Transmission): https://www.minelab.com/anzea/knowledge-base/key-technologies

Some good info in there. Minelab does use multi-frequency TX and RX but their analysis is magic sauce. Imagine they have some sophisticated analysis. As you well know, if there was AI involved anywhere, their marketing would ensure we know allll about it.

Alternative avenues of improvement include ZVT (as mentioned above, this was the main innovation in the GPZ 7000, released 2015, new updated model on same platform expected in the relatively near future) and innovative coil design (for example, the recent rise of concentric coils for the GPZ, some recent patents for coils in which a flat-wound coil is twisted at front and rear to be vertically oriented, to reduce saturation from ground mineralisation and other designs).

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BrokeInBendigo said:

Exactly. Your experiencing running with GB off illustrates how much detecting depth depends on the ground handling. 

Think I’d still rather have our Aussie sized nuggets and hotter ground than your mild soils and fine gold 😅 hope you can make it over here some time for a prospecting adventure and smash some personal bests!

Just imagine how many of your big Aussie nuggets are left in the ground as current technology can't get deep enough, so if they improve ground balance at some point in the future the possibilities are great.   NZ is a great training ground, finding little dinks at depth with small variations in threshold, the ever slightest of target response is very good training for when better ground is encountered.    The depth I see Aussies get the little nuggets and carry on they were deep in videos is quite funny, the fact they call them little, and the fact they think they were deep.  It really demonstrates the differences in soil conditions and detector performance in different conditions though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, phrunt said:

Just imagine how many of your big Aussie nuggets are left in the ground as current technology can't get deep enough

Just imagine also that this is often largely myth, as plenty of scrape to detect operations have proven over the years. Yes, there are locations where large nuggets lurk just out of reach. But more often than not, desert deposits are formed by a very specific type of wind erosion called deflation, where light surface material erodes away over millenia, leaving extremely rich surface deposits. These deposits deplete rapidly at depth, as many an oldtimer found, when big money was spent going deeper at these places. The result almost always being that the miner went bust. Dreams are the stuff detecting is made of, and this one is lodged firmly in many minds, but the reality is far duller, I'm sorry to say. But sure, big nuggets down deep, newer AI detectors, dream on lads. :smile:

Eolian Placers

"Eolian gold placers have a specific structure. The producing horizon overlies the deflation surface like a blanket, with its thickness extremely small (tens of centimeters)…."

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My experience in the one time I participated in removing 6” to a foot of soil from known patches hit dozens of targets… unfortunately all a byproduct of the equipments blade and bucket, lol. Words of wisdom from our benefactor.
 

Are there areas if you have desert property you would concentrate search effort in the  terrain more likely to hold deeper gold? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 1515Art said:

Are there areas if you have desert property you would concentrate search effort in the  terrain more likely to hold deeper gold? 

Yes, there are places pushes still reveal a lot more gold. It all depends on the depositional environment to begin with. The obvious one is deeper washes.

But the key factor, no matter where you are at, is to find spots where the erosional forces bringing rock/soil down onto a patch were either greater or less than the erosional force removing rock/soil from the patch. That's the basic balance to keep in mind when evaluating a spot. 

In places where high energy events occured - floods, landslides, streams, glaciers, or gravity due to very steep terrain - in general deposit more overburden via erosion than is removed by wind, you might get deeper patches. Where the converse is true, especially where mineralization is not geologically ancient (like NNV), deflation dominates and usually dictates a shallower maximum patch depth.

In AZ you often get both a shallow enriched surface (deflationary) patch from wind, together with a deeper, less concentrated patch at depth because of this. Each individual location varies due to it's geomorphological history. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/7/2022 at 7:36 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

The problem with a lot of this theorizing about machine learning, is that metal detectors know less than most people think. For instance, they have no idea what metal is under the coil. Any metal can read almost anywhere, depending on the size of the target. Target id only works for items that never vary, like a silver dime, yet many trash items can mimic a silver dime. Still, you can build a detector that can cherry pick coins rather effectively for use in the U.S.

Steve,

Thank you for replying and giving us the answer that should have been said on the first page in my opinion.

I only asked the question about a color screen to see how many responses there would be.

I have used the NOX 800 and have found several silver coins wit a wide range of target ID's. Such as a few quarters, dimes and even 2 trimes. They each are silver but have a different ID at different depths, or even if they are on edge or flat. The larger silver coins have been in the 30's while the trime has been in the mid 20's.

I enjoyed your response and have seen first hand just how depth and orientation of the coins will give a inaccurate ID. I have also had can slaw read the same as silver coins and have dug many pounds while detecting like so many others who swings a detector.

I have no idea  if AI could ever work on a detector for any useful edge in this hobby. Computers are only as good as the programmer and today detectors are more computers on a stick.

Like so many others that would love to see an all knowing detector, I would probably buy one.

Thank you for the reply and thank you for this site to help so many people like me understand how to use a detector and what to look for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Valens Legacy said:

...

I have no idea  if AI could ever work on a detector for any useful edge in this hobby. Computers are only as good as the programmer and today detectors are more computers on a stick.

...

This is the big shift with machine learning (what we are, for convenience, referring to as "AI").

Computers are no longer only as good as the programmer. Computers are better than the programmer - much, much better.

Perhaps disturbingly, the programmer has no functional access to the logical process an AI uses to make a given decision. It is too complex and abstract, humans generally cannot understand it, despite being able to analyse that decision-making process.

Put a coil on an AI and you could have a detector that rivals and even surpasses the work of human genius.

Just one example of machine learning revolutionising a data analysis problem (which humans have spent a very significant amount of time and money on): https://www.escardio.org/The-ESC/Press-Office/Press-releases/machine-learning-overtakes-humans-in-predicting-death-or-heart-attack

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...