MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multiscale structure in sedimentary basins

2004· article· en· W2121369179 on OpenAlexaff
Simon A. Stewart, Geoffrey J. Hay, Paul L. Rosin, Tim Wynn

Bibliographic record

VenueBasin Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)GeologyScale spaceA priori and a posterioriGeologic mapContext (archaeology)OutcropComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePaleontologyCartographyImage processingGeographyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hierarchies of superimposed structures are found in maps of geological horizons in sedimentary basins. Mapping based on three‐dimensional (3D) seismic data includes structures that range in scale from tens of metres to hundreds of kilometres. Extraction of structures from these maps without a priori knowledge of scale and shape is analogous to pattern recognition problems that have been widely researched in disciplines outside of Geoscience. A number of these lessons are integrated and applied within a geological context here. We describe a method for generating multiscale representations from two‐dimensional sections and 3D surfaces, and illustrate how superimposed geological structures can be topologically analysed. Multiscale analysis is done in two stages – generation of scale‐space as a geometrical attribute, followed by identification of significant scale‐space objects. Results indicate that Gaussian filtering is a more robust method than conventional moving average filtering for deriving multiscale geological structure. We introduce the concept of natural scales for identifying the most significant scales in a geological cross section. In three dimensions, scale‐dependent structures are identified via an analogous process as discrete topological entities within a four‐dimensional scale‐space cube. Motivation for this work is to take advantage of the completeness of seismic data coverage to see ‘beyond the outcrop’ and yield multiscale geological structure. Applications include identifying artefacts, scale‐specific features and large‐scale structural domains, facilitating multiscale structural attribute mapping for reservoir characterisation, and a novel approach to fold structure classification.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.322
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBasin ResearchSame topicGeological Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207