MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009988422 · doi:10.1190/1.2890407

Adaptive separation of free-surface multiples through independent component analysis

2008· article· en· W2009988422 on OpenAlexaff
Sam T. Kaplan, K. A. Innanen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultipleSubtractionTRACE (psycholinguistics)Computer scienceAlgorithmBlind signal separationConstruct (python library)Filter (signal processing)Surface (topology)WaveletIndependent component analysisComponent (thermodynamics)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsArithmeticPhysicsComputer visionChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a three-stage algorithm for adaptive separation of free-surface multiples. The free-surface multiple elimination (FSME) method requires, as deterministic prerequisites, knowledge of the source wavelet and deghosted data. In their absence, FSME provides an estimate of free-surface multiples that must be subtracted adaptively from the data. First we construct several orders from the free-surface multiple prediction formula. Next we use the full recording duration of any given data trace to construct filters that attempt to match the data and the multiple predictions. This kind of filter produces adequate phase results, but the order-by-order nature of the free-surface algorithm brings results that remain insufficient for straightforward subtraction. Then we construct, trace by trace, a mixing model in which the mixtures are the data trace and its orders of multiple predictions. We separate the mixtures through a blind source separation technique, in particular by employing independent component analysis. One of the recovered signals is a data trace without free-surface multiples. This technique sidesteps the subtraction inherent in most adaptive subtraction methods by separating the desired signal from the free-surface multiples. The method was applied to synthetic and field data. We compared the field data to a published method and found comparable results.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations47
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207