MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984780695 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.20141409

Integrating FWI with Surface-wave Inversion to Enhance Near-surface Modelling in a Shallow-water Setting at Eldfisk

2014· article· en· W1984780695 on OpenAlexaff
E.J. Wiarda, Simon Shaw, D. Boiero, A. Gundersen, Landis West

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)GeologySurface waveWaveformGeodesyEnvironmental geologyGeophysicsSeismologyAcousticsComputer sciencePhysicsTectonicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Following a ‘noise becomes signal’ philosophy, we have successfully integrated surface-wave inversion and early-arrival full-waveform inversion on a multicomponent ocean-bottom cable dataset, thus extracting more information from the recorded field data. In the near-surface above the Eldfisk Field, Norwegian North Sea, two perpendicular sets of Pleistocene subglacial tunnel valley systems have been resolved at two depth ranges between the seabed and 300m depth of the updated Vp model by this integrated inversion scheme. This indicates that the integrated near-surface Vp model is of high resolution both laterally and vertically and explains surface-waves and the early arrivals, diving waves, or both. We have demonstrated that surface-wave inversion complements full-waveform inversion by providing a near-surface (0–150 m) Vp model in a depth range where full-waveform inversion techniques typically produce suboptimal results due to null-space issues, vertical resolution limitations and errors in source wavelet, density approximations, multiple modelling, and acoustic assumptions. The combined full-waveform inversion and surface-wave inversion Vp model update in the near-surface significantly flattens the common-image gather events between 0–1000 m and deeper. This confirms the validity of these near-surface updates.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedingsSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207