MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034866232 · doi:10.1190/1.3513117

Seismic attributes on frequency‐enhanced seismic data

2010· article· en· W2034866232 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Satinder Chopra, Kurt J. Marfurt, Somanath Misra

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySeismologyComputer scienceSynthetic seismogram

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seismic data are usually contaminated by both random and coherent noise, even when the data have been migrated reasonably well and are multiple-free. Seismic attributes are particularly effective at extracting subtle features from relatively noise-free data. Certain types of noise can be addressed by the interpreter through careful structure-oriented filtering or post migration footprint suppression. However, if the data are contaminated by multiples or are poorly focused and imaged due to inaccurate velocities, the data need to go back to the processing team to alleviate those problems. Another common problem with seismic data is their relatively low bandwidth. Significant efforts are made during processing to enhance the frequency content of the data as much as possible to provide a spectral response that is consistent with the acquisition parameters. Ironically, the interpreters can be somewhat more aggressive in their filtering. The interpreters will have a better understanding of the geology, the play concept, access to any well data, and therefore be better able to keep or reject alternative filter products that are consistent or inconsistent with the interpretation hypothesis. We begin our discussion by reviewing alternative means of suppressing random noise on our migrated seismic images, with the most promising methods being various implementations of structure-oriented filtering. Next, we address acquisition footprint, which may appear to be random in the temporal domain but is highly correlated to the acquisition geometry in the spatial domain. After running the data through the cleaning phase, we evaluate alternative methods for frequency enhancement of the input seismic data. We illustrate the impact of these preconditioning steps on the computation of the attributes such as coherence and curvature on data volumes from Alberta, Canada. We conclude with a summary on the choice of the frequency-enhancement methods on the basis of the examples generated with different workflows.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207