MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098805872 · doi:10.1071/aseg2012ab109

Making sense of all that AVO stuff!

2012· article· en· W2098805872 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)Stack (abstract data type)Amplitude versus offsetGeologyReflectivityOffset (computer science)Seismic inversionComputer scienceSeismologyAmplitudeRemote sensingMathematicsOpticsGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SummaryThe Amplitude Variations with Offset (AVO) technique, and the related technique of pre-stack seismic inversion, has grown to include a multitude of sub-techniques, each with its own assumptions. This vast array of techniques makes it difficult for the interpreting geophysicist to understand how they are all related, and which method should be used in a particular exploration area. In this talk I will present a framework from which all of the current AVO and pre-stack seismic inversion methods can be understood. This will involve looking at the concept of seismic reflectivity in its various forms, as well as inverted reflectivity, or impedance. To illustrate the various AVO and pre-stack inversion techniques, I will use a gas sand example from central Alberta, Canada.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207