MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991856948 · doi:10.1190/1.2896619

Introduction to this special section—Seismic Attributes

2008· article· en· W1991856948 on OpenAlexaff
Satinder Chopra, Kurt J. Marfurt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsARC Resources (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyWrenchSeismic attributeLithologySeismic to simulationSection (typography)FaciesInterpretation (philosophy)HorizonSeismologySeismic inversionPetrologyPaleontologyComputer scienceEngineeringAzimuthGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seismic attributes are a great aid in both the qualitative and quantitative mapping of subsurface geologic features. Even before classical interpretation of picking horizons and generating maps begins, animating through appropriate seismic attribute volumes can quickly define the structural fabric and delineate major stratigraphic features. Seismic attributes have proven useful in almost every geologic environment, from clastics through carbonates to volcanic, and from normal faulting through wrench faulting to reverse faulting. Thus, seismic attributes facilitate recognition of depositional environments and enhance the recognition of seismic facies. Once calibrated at well locations, attributes can be used to identify seismic facies and provide information about both lithology and fluids, with or without the use of reference horizons. For this reason, seismic attributes form an integral part of most interpretation projects completed today. A complete book on seismic attributes, Seismic Attributes for Prospect Identification and Reservoir Characterization, has been published by SEG recently.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0930.068

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207