Collect a magnetic survey along the traverse with a calibrated total-field magnetometer, recording time, accurately surveyed position and sensor height. Extend observations beyond the crater to establish the background, repeat stations or tie lines to test consistency, and use a stationary base-station magnetometer to monitor temporal field changes. Keep the instrument away from vehicles, fences and magnetic equipment; map unavoidable cultural sources rather than treating them as geological signals.
Correct instrument offsets and heading effects where applicable, remove measured diurnal variation, reject or separately treat magnetic-storm intervals, and subtract the appropriate large-scale geomagnetic field at the survey epoch. Level overlapping traverses and state whether a local regional trend has also been removed. Unlike gravity, there is no universal rock-independent Bouguer correction for magnetic topography: a magnetic topographic effect needs a model of terrain and magnetization.
Measure representative magnetic susceptibility and remanent magnetization on oriented rock samples to interpret the profile. Total field alone does not tell whether a contrast comes from induced or remanent magnetization, crater excavation, or strongly magnetic material in the infill.
The supplied south–north profile has a large southern/interior negative trough and a sharp positive peak toward the northern rim. That is opposite to the simplest positive, presently induced magnetic body in question 5(d). It therefore does not justify interpreting the crater as a concentration of strongly magnetic meteorite material.
A negative magnetization contrast from replacing magnetic basalt already reverses the simple induced-body response. In addition, the target Deccan Traps can retain strong remanent magnetization whose direction differs from the present geomagnetic field; crater excavation and rim geometry then produce a strong magnetic topographic effect. Rock-magnetic measurements and forward modelling distinguish these contributions. A primary study of this crater attributes most of its anomaly to magnetized target basalts and topography, with a comparatively small contribution from the breccia and post-impact sediment.[ref]
The curve alone is not a unique diagnosis of reversed polarity, impact-induced magnetization or a buried iron mass. The physical conclusion supported by the comparison is that a positive induced-body model is inadequate; inherited target-rock magnetization, its removal and geometry must be modelled.