MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145858541 · doi:10.1190/1.3374434

Refocusing migrated seismic images in absorptive media

2010· article· en· W2145858541 on OpenAlexafffund
Changjun Zhang, Tadeusz J. Ulrych

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaColorado School of Mines
KeywordsDeblurringDeconvolutionSeismic migrationAbsorption (acoustics)Geophysical imagingConvergence (economics)AlgorithmComputer scienceGeologyInverse problemFunction (biology)SeismologyImage restorationImage (mathematics)MathematicsOpticsPhysicsImage processingMathematical analysisComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In seismic exploration, received seismic signals usually experience absorption during their propagation. However, seismic migration algorithms seldom take into account seismic absorption in their implementations. We have investigated the blurring effect in migrated images that occurs when using a regular migration algorithm to migrate those seismic data with absorption. The blurring functions can be calculated using a numerical method; and for layered media, a fast algorithm exists for updating the blurring function from one time step to another. The deblurring process is formulated as a problem of multidimensional nonstationary deconvolution. We use a least-squares inverse scheme to remove the absorption blurring effect and in turn refocus migrated images. The refocusing algorithm is stable, and convergence is achieved with a few iterations at each wavenumber. Experiments on synthetic and real data show that our refocusing technique is valid when compensating for seismic absorption after migration.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207