Bandwidth enhancement: Inverse Q filtering or time-varying Wiener deconvolution?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Dispersion and attenuation corrections can improve the resolution of seismic data. This significantly facilitates interpretation. In principle, inverse Q filtering and the time-varying Wiener deconvolution can achieve this. Inverse Q filtering is a deterministic process that requires knowledge of the quality factor Q, whereas the time-varying Wiener deconvolution is a statistical approach based on the estimation of the nonstationary propagating wavelet. Dispersion corrections based on phase-only inverse Q filtering is an inherently stable method that is robust in the presence of noise. Attenuation corrections via amplitude-only inverse Q filtering, on the other hand, is likely to lead to noise amplification as well as bandwidth enhancement. Dispersion corrections via the time-varying Wiener deconvolution are challenging because these require estimation of a nonstationary, frequency-dependent, nonminimum-phase wavelet. Fortunately, attenuation corrections via the Wiener deconvolution need only estimation of a zero-phase time-varying wavelet for which robust methods exist. The most promising procedure for combined dispersion and attenuation correction is thus comprised of first applying dispersion corrections using phase-only inverse Q filtering, followed by zero-phase time-varying Wiener deconvolution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it