A study of fuzzy <i>c</i> -means coupling for joint inversion, using seismic tomography and gravity data test scenarios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Joint inversion, the inversion of multiple geophysical data sets containing complementary information about the subsurface, has the potential to significantly improve inversion results by reducing the nonuniqueness of the inverse problem. One of the challenges of joint inversion is deciding how to couple the multiple physical property models. If a coupling approach is used that is inconsistent with the physical truth, then inversion artifacts can occur and may lead to incorrect interpretations. In this paper, we investigated the fuzzy c-means (FCM) clustering approach to provide a lithological coupling of the seismic velocity and density models in joint 2D inversions of first-arrival traveltimes and gravity data. Even though this coupling approach has been used in previous works, recommendations for its effective use have not yet been developed. We conducted a suite of joint inversion tests on synthetic data generated from a geologically realistic model based on magmatic massive sulfide deposits. There is a known relationship between seismic velocity and density for the silicate rocks and sulfide minerals involved; this lithological relationship was used to design a clustered coupling strategy in the joint inversions. The tests we conducted clearly exhibited the benefits of joint inversion using FCM coupling. Our work revealed the effects of including inaccurate a priori physical property information. We also evaluated approaches to assess whether such inaccurate information may have been used.
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 | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".