MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126486604 · doi:10.1190/1.3555082

Linearized AVO and poroelasticity

2011· article· en· W2126486604 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmplitude versus offsetPoromechanicsWeightingPrestackAmplitudeGeologyMathematicsGeotechnical engineeringSeismologyPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The technique of amplitude variation with offset (AVO) allows geoscientists to extract fluid and lithology information from the analysis of prestack seismic amplitudes. Various AVO parameterizations exist, all of which involve the sum of three weighted elastic-constant terms. In present-day AVO approaches, the weighting terms involve either knowledge of the incidence angle only, or knowledge of both the incidence angle and the in situ VP/VS ratio. We have used the theory of poroelasticity to derive a generalized AVO approximation that provides the estimation of fluid, rigidity, and density parameters. We have combined two previously independent AVO formulations, thus reducing, instead of adding to, the total number of formulations. This new approach requires knowledge of a third parameter to compute the weights: the dry-rock VP/VS ratio. We have derived a new equation and applied it to model and real data sets. The new formulation has allowed us to estimate fluid properties of the reservoir in a more direct manner than previous formulations.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.159 · 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