## 4 Results and Discussion
This also reversely proves that our approach of using aeromagnetic data to guide the next step of mineral exploration by identifying potential rock boundaries is feasible. We note that in the BMA region of the reduced-to-the-pole map, there are two long, linear anomalies trending northeast and north-south, respectively, which are not obvious in the reduced-to-the-pole map. They may be caused by intrusive rocks that developed along faults in the strata. Figure 8 shows the solutions of the AN-EUL method. The locations were selected from the analytical signal grid of reduced-to-pole data, using parameter 1 to pick the peak values, and to avoid picking too many peaks at weak anomaly positions that may be caused by noise, the positions with analytical signal values less than 0.02 were filtered out after experimenting. The solutions of AN-EUL gave an average value of SI = 1.4. Then, the located Euler deconvolution was applied to the reduced-to-the-pole grid with SI = 1.5 based on the AN-EUL results, and the solutions are presented in Figure 9.  
From both Figures 8 and 9, the Euler deconvolution results show good linear characteristics. Based on the geological background of the study area, the linear clusters of these symbols may reflect the locations of the underlying magnetic body boundaries or faults. The linear structures formed by these colored symbols on the plane have a high degree of overlap with the zero-value line's area, and a mutually verifying effect can be formed between the two methods. However, it is also easy to see that the solutions of the Euler inversion are more dispersed and discontinuous than the zero-value lines of the tilt angle, which is due to the Euler deconvolution solutions not being able to satisfy the error limit at every point, and the fact that the analytical signal peak used in the located Euler deconvolution cannot completely select all the boundary locations. The main trends of both solutions are northeast-southwest or north-south, with a few being nearly east-west or north-south. These solutions are mainly shallow, with  
Figure 7: The tilt angle map of the DZL area. The purple dashed lines represent the zero value of the tilt angle, which is approximately demarcated by the yellow zero-value line in the grid map. most of the magnetic sources having depths of mainly below 1000 m, with the main distribution between 100 m and 600 m. The locations of the DZL deposit and its western and northeastern sides, the central part of SMA2, and the locations of the IMAs all show very shallow magnetic source depths. If the magnetic sources are the contact zones of rock bodies, this suggests that most of the rock bodies in the study area have relatively shallow emplacement, which is very favorable for future exploration and mining work. Overall, the solutions from both methods in Figures 8 and 9 have a similar appearance on the plane, but there are also some differences. The solutions in Figure 8 are more continuous at anomalous edges, and the range of shallow-source solution distribution is relatively larger as well. Additionally, Figure 8 contains several straight-line-type solutions that are quite regular in both east-west and north-south directions, whereas the solutions in Figure 9 appear to be somewhat \"natural\". These differences mainly stem from their differing computational methods. AN-EUL calculates depth and SI directly using multiple orders of analytic signals based on selected peak positions; thus, its SI is non-fixed, which may better fit actual geological conditions in certain areas. However, as long as the denominator is not zero, it will have a solution, leading to continuous straight-line solutions at some locations--this also relates to the point peaking and masking. Located Euler devolution uses a fixed SI for calculations and excludes obviously unreasonable solutions through setting error limits and maximum values.