MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037469421 · doi:10.1190/geo2012-0104.1

Regularized seismic full waveform inversion with prior model information

2013· article· en· W2037469421 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsGeoscience BC
FundersGrand Équipement National De Calcul Intensif
KeywordsInversion (geology)SmoothingComputer scienceAlgorithmInverse problemPrior informationWeightingTikhonov regularizationSynthetic dataPrior probabilityMathematical optimizationBayesian probabilityGeologyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Full waveform inversion (FWI) delivers high-resolution quantitative images and is a promising technique to obtain macroscale physical property model of the subsurface. In most geophysical applications, prior information, such as that collected in wells, is available and should be used to increase the image reliability. For this, we propose to introduce three terms in the definition of the FWI misfit function: the data misfit itself, the first-order Tikhonov regularization term acting as a smoothing operator, and a prior model norm term. This last term is the way to smoothly introduce prior information into the FWI workflow. On a selected target of the Marmousi synthetic example, significant improvement was obtained when using the prior model term for noise-free and noisy synthetic data. The prior model term may significantly reduce the inversion sensitivity to incorrect initial conditions. The limited range of spatial wavenumber sampling by the acquisition may be compensated with the prior model information, for multiple-free and multiple-contaminated data. Prior and initial models play different roles in the inversion scheme. The starting model is used for wave propagation and therefore drives the data-misfit gradient, whereas the prior model is never explicitly used for solving the wave equation and only drives the optimization step as an additional constraint to minimize the total objective function. Thus, the prior model is not required to follow kinematic properties as precisely as the initial model, except in zones of poor illumination. In addition, we investigate the influence of a simple dynamic decreasing weighting of the prior model term. Once the cycle-skipping problem has been solved, the impact of the prior model term is gradually reduced within the misfit function to be driven by seismic-data only.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.158 · 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