Making the most out of the least (squares migration)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Standard migration images can suffer from migration artifacts due to 1) poor source-receiver sampling, 2) weak amplitudes caused by geometric spreading, 3) attenuation, 4) defocusing, 5) poor resolution due to limited source-receiver aperture, and 6) ringiness caused by a ringy source wavelet. To partly remedy these problems, least-squares migration (LSM), also known as linearized seismic inversion or migration deconvolution (MD), proposes to linearly invert seismic data for the reflectivity distribution. If the migration velocity model is sufficiently accurate, then LSM can mitigate many of the above problems and lead to a more resolved migration image, sometimes with twice the spatial resolution. However, there are two problems with LSM: the cost can be an order of magnitude more than standard migration and the quality of the LSM image is no better than the standard image for velocity errors of 5% or more. We now show how to get the most from least-squares migration by reducing the cost and velocity sensitivity of LSM.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.006 |
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".