Low-rank Promoting Transformations and Tensor Interpolation - Applications to Seismic Data Denoising
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary In this abstract, we extend our previous work in Hierarchical Tucker (HT) tensor completion, which uses an extremely efficient representation for representing high-dimensional tensors exhibit- ing low-rank structure, to handle subsampled tensors with noisy entries. We consider a ‘low-noise’ case, so that the energies of the noise and the signal are nearly indistinguishable, and a ‘high-noise’ case, in which the noise energy is now scaled to the amplitude of the entire data volume. We exam- ine the effect of the noise in terms of the singular values along different matricizations of the data, i.e. reshaping of the tensor along different modes. By interpreting this effect in the context of tensor completion, we demonstrate the inefficacy of denoising by this method in the source-receiver do- main. In light of this observation, we transform the decimated, noisy data in to the midpoint-offset domain, which promotes low-rank behaviour in the signal and high-rank behaviour in the noise. This distinction between signal and noise allows low-rank interpolation to effectively denoise the signal with only a marginal increase in computational cost. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach on a 4D frequency slice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".