Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-linear solution strategies to the least-squares seismic inverse-scattering problem with sparseness and continuity constraints are proposed. Our approach is designed to (i) deal with substantial amounts of additive noise (SNR < 0 dB); (ii) use the sparseness and locality (both in position and angle) of directional basis functions (such as curvelets and contourlets) on the model: the reflectivity; and (iii) exploit the near invariance of these basis functions under the normal operator, i.e., the scattering-followed-by-imaging operator. Signal-to-noise ratio and the continuity along the imaged reflectors are significantly enhanced by formulating the solution of the seismic inverse problem in terms of an optimization problem. During the optimization, sparseness on the basis and continuity along the reflectors are imposed by jointly minimizing the l1- and anisotropic diffusion/total-variation norms on the coefficients and reflectivity, respectively. [Joint work with Peyman P. Moghaddam was carried out as part of the SINBAD project, with financial support secured through ITF (the Industry Technology Facilitator) from the following organizations: BG Group, BP, ExxonMobil, and SHELL. Additional funding came from the NSERC Discovery Grants 22R81254.]
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".