MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fast waveform inversion without source‐encoding

2012· article· en· W1791057025 on OpenAlexaff
Tristan van Leeuwen, Felix J. Herrmann

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceStochastic optimizationEncoding (memory)Mathematical optimizationConvergence (economics)Optimization problemSet (abstract data type)Stylized factAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Randomized source‐encoding has recently been proposed as a way to dramatically reduce the costs of full waveform inversion. The main idea is to replace all sequential sources by a small number of simultaneous sources. This introduces random cross‐talk in model updates and special stochastic optimization strategies are required to deal with this. Two problems arise with this approach: i) source‐encoding can only be applied to fixed‐spread acquisition setups and ii) stochastic optimization methods tend to converge very slowly, relying on averaging to suppress the cross‐talk. Although the slow convergence is partly off‐set by a low iteration cost, we show that conventional optimization strategies are bound to outperform stochastic methods in the long run. In this paper we argue that we do not need randomized source‐encoding to reap the benefits of stochastic optimization and we review an optimization strategy that combines the benefits of both conventional and stochastic optimization. The method uses a gradually increasing batch of sources. Thus, iterations are initially very cheap and this allows the method to make fast progress in the beginning. As the batch‐size grows, the method behaves like conventional optimization, allowing for fast convergence. Stylized numerical examples suggest that the stochastic and hybrid methods perform equally well with and without source‐encoding and that the hybrid method outperforms both conventional and stochastic optimization. The method does not rely on source‐encoding techniques and can thus be applied to marine data. We illustrate this on a realistic synthetic model.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations99
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical ProspectingSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207