MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086288874 · doi:10.1190/geo2014-0116.1

Robust reduced-rank filtering for erratic seismic noise attenuation

2014· article· en· W2086288874 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ke Chen, Mauricio D. Sacchi

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical and numerical algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsSingular value decompositionMathematicsGaussian noiseNoise (video)AlgorithmHankel matrixRank (graph theory)DeconvolutionNoise reductionMatrix decompositionSingular valueFactorizationFilter (signal processing)Computer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Singular spectrum analysis (SSA) or Cadzow reduced-rank filtering is an efficient method for random noise attenuation. SSA starts by embedding the seismic data into a Hankel matrix. Rank reduction of this Hankel matrix followed by antidiagonal averaging is utilized to estimate an enhanced seismic signal. Rank reduction is often implemented via the singular value decomposition (SVD). The SVD is a nonrobust matrix factorization technique that leads to suboptimal results when the seismic data are contaminated by erratic noise. The term erratic noise designates non-Gaussian noise that consists of large isolated events with known or unknown distribution. We adopted a robust low-rank factorization that permitted use of the SSA filter in situations in which the data were contaminated by erratic noise. In our robust SSA method, we replaced the quadratic error criterion function that yielded the truncated SVD solution by a bisquare function. The Hankel matrix was then approximated by the product of two lower dimensional factor matrices. The iteratively reweighed least-squares method was used to approximately solve for the optimal robust factorization. Our algorithm was tested with synthetic and real data. In our synthetic examples, the data were contaminated with band-limited Gaussian noise and erratic noise. Then, denoising was carried out by means of f-x deconvolution, the classical SSA method, and the proposed robust SSA method. The f-x deconvolution and the classical SSA method failed to properly eliminate the noise and to preserve the desired signal. On the other hand, the robust SSA method was found to be immune to erratic noise and was able to preserve the desired signal. We also tested the robust SSA method with a data set from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin. The results with this data set revealed improved denoising performance in portions of data contaminated with erratic noise.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations134
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicStatistical and numerical algorithmsFrench-language works237,207