MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970180363 · doi:10.1785/0120110162

Wave-Field Decomposition of Ocean Bottom Seismograms

2012· article· en· W1970180363 on OpenAlexaff
M. G. Bostock, A. M. Tréhu

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the Seismological Society of America · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeologySeismogramOcean bottomSeismologyField (mathematics)DecompositionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seismograms recorded on the seafloor are affected by reverberations in the overlying ocean layer. We examine the feasibility of removing these reverberations through a 1D wave‐field decomposition based on a reflection–transmission formulation of the problem. Two decomposition schemes are presented. The first scheme involves a simple manipulation of the fundamental matrix relating stress and displacement of plane harmonic waves to upgoing and downgoing wavevector coefficients and requires measurement of both ocean bottom displacement and pressure. The second approach involves only displacement recordings and knowledge of the water column depth. This latter quantity will generally be known a priori from deployment logs, or, alternatively, it may be estimated using vertical displacement and pressure seismograms in a preprocessing step. Both approaches require prior information on seabed properties. In the case of P ‐wave incidence, the decomposition depends primarily on the seabed S velocity β . This quantity can be determined by examining trial decompositions over a range of β ’s and selecting the value that minimizes the energy of the upgoing S ‐wave component at the arrival time of the incident wave. We apply this approach to synthetic seismograms for a simple Earth structure and to recordings of two large events from the Central Oregon Locked Zone Array (COLZA) on the continental margin of Oregon. The real data indicate that the wave‐field decompositions are largely successful at lower frequencies (<0.1  Hz) but that 3D scattering, likely originating near the sediment–basement contact, is manifested at higher frequencies.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.210 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations19
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207