MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2015388470 · doi:10.1190/1.2148115

Automatic selection of reference velocities for recursive depth migration by peak search method

2005· article· en· W2015388470 on OpenAlexaff
Hugh D. Geiger, Gary F. Margravé

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtrapolationInterpolation (computer graphics)AlgorithmRange (aeronautics)Fourier transformSelection (genetic algorithm)Distribution (mathematics)Computer scienceMathematicsGeodesyMathematical analysisGeologyTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wave equation depth migration methods such as phaseshift plus interpolation, extended split-step Fourier, or Fourier finite difference plus interpolation, require a limited set of reference velocities for efficient wavefield extrapolation through laterally inhomogeneous velocity models. In basic implementations, reference velocities are selected as either a linear or a geometric progression spanning the range of model velocities. However, it is unlikely that the model velocities are distributed linearly or geometrically. If the reference velocities can be distributed statistically to more closely approximate the actual distribution, the accuracy of the extrapolation step can be improved. Key features of our automatic reference velocity selection algorithm are 1) division of the velocity distribution into clusters 2) entropy based statistical control to determine the minimal number of reference velocities required within a cluster, 3) selection of reference velocities within each cluster at or near peaks in the probability distribution, and 4) calculation of a single reference velocity if the velocity range within each cluster is less than a minimum threshold. The automatic velocity selection algorithm is implemented as part of a prestack PSPI depth migration of the 2D Marmousi model. The algorithm is suitable for 3D data, where the tradeoff between accuracy and efficiency is more pronounced.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques→French-language works237,207→