MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1960107577 · doi:10.1002/ggge.20081

The influence of nonuniform ambient noise on crustal tomography in Europe

2013· article· en· W1960107577 on OpenAlexaff
P. Basini, Tarje Nissen‐Meyer, Lapo Boschi, Emanuele Casarotti, J. Verbeke, Olaf Schenk, Domenico Giardini

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Geophysics Geosystems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbient noise levelGeologyNoise (video)SeismologySeismic noiseInversion (geology)Context (archaeology)TomographyEarth structureSensitivity (control systems)Cross-correlationGeophysicsRemote sensingTectonicsPhysicsOpticsComputer scienceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ambient‐noise seismology is of great relevance to high‐resolution crustal imaging, thanks to the unprecedented dense data coverage it affords in regions of little seismicity. Under the assumption of uniformly distributed noise sources, it has been used to extract the Green's function between two receivers. We determine the imprint of this assumption by means of wave propagation and adjoint methods in realistic 3‐D Earth models. In this context, we quantify the sensitivity of ambient‐noise cross‐correlations from central Europe with respect to noise‐source locations and shear wave‐speed structure. We use ambient noise recorded over 1 year at 196 stations, resulting in a database of 864 cross‐correlations. Our mesh is built upon a combined crustal and 3‐D tomographic model. We simulate synthetic ambient‐noise cross‐correlations in different frequency bands using a 3‐D spectral‐element method. Traveltime cross‐correlation measurements in these different frequency bands define the misfit between synthetics and observations as a basis to compute sensitivity kernels using the adjoint method. We perform a comprehensive analysis varying geographic station and noise‐source distributions around the European seas. The deterministic sensitivity analysis allows for estimating where the starting crustal model shows better accordance with our data set, and gain insight into the distribution of noise sources in the European region. This highlights the potential importance of considering localized noise distributions for tomographic imaging, and forms the basis of a tomographic inversion in which the distribution of noise sources may be treated as a free parameter similar to earthquake tomography.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry Geophysics GeosystemsSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207