MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040788466 · doi:10.1190/1.3447781

Subsalt 3D VSP imaging at Deimos Field in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico

2010· article· en· W2040788466 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Burch, Brian Hornby, Hans Sugianto, Bertram Nolte

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsBP (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeophoneGeologyGeophysical imagingSeismologyVertical seismic profilePassive seismic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At Deimos Field in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico, surface seismic imaging cannot fully image sedimentary structure near the steeply dipping base of salt. 3D vertical seismic profile (VSP) imaging was introduced to the deepwater GOM to improve seismic imaging of complex structural and stratigraphic features (Ray et al., 2003; Hornby et al., 2006) and recently has been used for imaging “blind spots” in surface seismic coverage (Hornby et al., 2005; Hornby et al., 2007). With this method, 3D surveys are conducted using a surface source vessel and downhole geophones. Here we investigate the use of 3D VSP imaging to complement the surface results with additional coverage beyond that of the surface seismic adjacent to the complex salt body.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207