Smith, Richard S.Olaniyan, OladeleMorris, Bill2019-10-032019-10-032013-07-26Olaniyan, O., Smith, R., and Morris, B., 2013, Qualitative geophysical interpretation of the Sudbury Structure: Interpretation, 1(1), T25–T43. doi: 10.1190/INT-2012-0010.12324-88582324-8866https://laurentian.scholaris.ca/handle/10219/3357This paper is © 2019 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. The posting is available free of charge and its use is subject to the SEG terms and conditions: https://seg.org/Terms-of-UseThe Sudbury Structure is one of the most studied geologic structures in the world due to its enigmatic nature and mineral wealth. The available geologic work from the literature and mining industry operations accumulated for more than a century was recently assessed and compiled into a bedrock geologic map. Most regional geophysical investigations of the Sudbury Structure have been quantitative — modeling and depth estimation without a clear definition of surface control. Airborne total magnetic intensity data over the Sudbury Structure were compiled, processed, and interpreted, to define magnetic stratigraphy boundaries and near-surface lineaments. Traditional directional and normalized derivatives were computed to enhance the high-frequency information in the magnetic field. Available airborne frequency-domain electromagnetic (EM) data were also interactively interpreted along profiles and in a gridded format to isolate conductive structures. On-screen geographic information system-based information extraction from multiple derivatives was used to interpret the magnetic contacts, dykes, and lineaments. The magnetic interpretation was compared with published bedrock maps of the Sudbury Structure. Magnetic contacts based on the qualitative classification of the magnetic texture did not always correspond to the geologic boundaries on the existing maps. Some magnetic lineaments corresponded with well-defined geologic structures, some were further extensions of partially mapped structures, and others are newly identified linear structures. Conductive locations identified from the EM profiles were probably due to responses from conductive ore bodies, faults, dykes, lithological contacts, and cultural objects.enArticle