MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018462081 · doi:10.1190/int-2014-0156.1

Correlation between seismic diffractions extracted from vertical seismic profiling data and borehole logging in a carbonate environment

2015· article· en· W2018462081 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexander Klokov, Д.Р. Иркабаев, Osareni C. Ogiesoba, Н.З. Мунасыпов

Bibliographic record

VenueInterpretation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersImperial College LondonMcGill UniversityUniversity of Texas at Austin
KeywordsGeologyVertical seismic profilePetrophysicsBoreholeSeismic to simulationLithologySeismologyCarbonateWell loggingTectonicsSeismic inversionPetrologyMineralogyGeophysicsGeotechnical engineeringPorosity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Seismic diffractions may play an important role in seismic interpretation because they characterize geologic objects that might not be visible for conventional seismic attribute analysis. Diffractivity may be caused by, and consequently may define, tectonic dislocations (faults and fractures), lithologic variations, and fluid saturation within rocks. We have tied seismic diffractions extracted from vertical seismic profiling (VSP) data and borehole logging, from which we recognized the reasons that were responsible for diffractivity of the strata. First, we processed a multisource multicomponent VSP data set to extract seismic diffractions and constructed diffraction images of the strata for all three of the VSP data components. Then, we performed joint analysis of well logs and diffractions to obtain petrophysical attributes associated with diffraction images. We divided the rock succession into several units, which have different diffraction properties. We identified compacted rock, alternating intervals, isolated fractured zones, and fluid-saturated layers.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterpretationSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207