MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spectral decomposition with <i>f</i>−<i>x</i>−<i>y</i> preconditioning

2013· article· en· W1547477044 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeconvolutionNoise (video)Representation (politics)AlgorithmComputer scienceDecompositionScale (ratio)Spectral resolutionRegional geologyGeologySpectral linePhysicsArtificial intelligenceSeismologyMetamorphic petrologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Spectral decomposition, or local time‐frequency analysis, tries to enhance the amount of information one can obtain from a seismic volume by finding the frequency content of the seismic data at each time sample. However, if a small amount of noise is present within the seismic amplitude volume, it has the potential to become more prominent in the spectrally decomposed data especially if high‐resolution or sparsity promoting methods are utilized. To combat this problem post‐processing noise removal has commonly been employed, but these techniques can potentially degrade the resolution of small‐scale geological structures in their attempt to remove this noise. Rather than de‐noising the spectrally decomposed data after they are generated, we propose to incorporate the ideas of f − x − y deconvolution within the spectral decomposition process to create an algorithm that has the ability to de‐noise the time‐frequency representation of the data as they are being generated. By incorporating the spatial prediction error filters that are utilized for f − x − y deconvolution with the spectral decomposition problem, a spatially smooth time‐frequency representation that maintains its sparsity, or high‐resolution characteristics, can be obtained. This spatially smooth high‐resolution time‐frequency representation is less likely to exhibit the random noise that was present in the more conventionally obtained time‐frequency representation. Tests on a real data set demonstrate that by de‐noising while the time‐frequency representation is being constructed, small‐scale geological structures are more likely to maintain their resolution since the de‐noised time‐frequency representation is specifically built to reconstruct the data.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it