Simply denoise: Wavefield reconstruction via jittered undersampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a new, discrete undersampling scheme designed to favor wavefield reconstruction by sparsity-promoting inversion with transform elements localized in the Fourier domain. The work is motivated by empirical observations in the seismic community, corroborated by results from compressive sampling, that indicate favorable (wavefield) reconstructions from random rather than regular undersampling. Indeed, random undersampling renders coherent aliases into harmless incoherent random noise, effectively turning the interpolation problem into a much simpler denoising problem. A practical requirement of wavefield reconstruction with localized sparsifying transforms is the control on the maximum gap size. Unfortunately, random undersampling does not provide such a control. Thus, we introduce a sampling scheme, termed jittered undersampling, that shares the benefits of random sampling and controls the maximum gap size. The contribution of jittered sub-Nyquist sampling is key in formu-lating a versatile wavefield sparsity-promoting recovery scheme that follows the principles of compressive sampling. After the behavior of the jittered-undersampling scheme in the Fourier domain is analyzed, its performance is studied for curvelet recovery by sparsity-promoting inversion (CRSI). The findings on synthetic and real seismic data indicate an improvement of several decibels over recovery from regularly undersampled data for the same amount of data collected.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".