MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A one-way wave equation for modelling seismic waveform variations due to elastic heterogeneity

2005· article· en· W2136551174 on OpenAlexaff
Doug Angus

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWavefrontDiffractionPropagatorExtrapolationPhysicsWave propagationSeismic waveScatteringIsotropyComputational physicsOpticsStatistical physicsMathematical analysisGeophysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of a new one-way narrow-angle elastic wave equation to isotropic heterogeneous media is described. This narrow-angle finite-difference propagator should provide an efficient and accurate method of simulating primary body wave(s) passing through smoothly varying heterogeneous media. Although computationally slower than ray theory, the narrow-angle propagator can model frequency-dependent forward diffraction and scattering as well as the averaging effects due to smooth variations in medium parameters that vary on the sub-Fresnel zone level. Example waveforms are presented for the propagation of body waves in deterministic as well as stochastic heterogeneous 3-D Earth models. Extrapolation within deterministic media will highlight various familiar wave-diffraction and pulse-distortion effects associated with large-scale inhomogeneities, such as geometrical spreading, wavefront folding and creeping-wave diffraction by a compact object. Simulation within stochastic media will examine the effects of varying the correlation lengths of random heterogeneities on wave propagation. In particular, wave phenomena such as frequency-dependent forward scattering, the appearance of random caustics and the generation of seismic coda will be shown.

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 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 score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207