Dispersion of interface waves in sediments with power-law shear speed profiles. II. Experimental observations and seismo-acoustic inversions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The propagation of seismic interface waves is investigated in soft marine sediments in which the density is constant, the shear modulus is small, and the profile of shear speed c(s) versus depth z is of the power-law form c(s) (z) = c0z(v), in which c0 and v are constants (0< v < 1). Both the phase speed V and the group speed U of interface waves scale with frequency as f(v/(v -1)) and they obey the simple relation U= (1 - v) V. These relations are derived in a simple way using ray theory and the WKB method; a companion paper [O. A. Godin and D. M. F. Chapman, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110, 1890 (2001)] rigorously derives the same result from the solutions to the equations of motion. The frequency scaling is shown to exist in experimental data sets of interface wave phase speed and group speed. Approximate analytical formulas for the dispersion relations (phase and group speed versus frequency) enable direct inversion of the profile parameters c0 and v from the experimental data. In cases for which there is multi-mode dispersion data, the water-sediment density ratio can be determined as well. The theory applies to vertically polarized (P-SV) modes as well as to horizontally polarized (SH) modes (that is, Love waves).
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it