MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Null-space and statistical significance of first-arrival traveltime inversion

2004· article· en· W2147259636 on OpenAlexaff
Igor B. Morozov

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassification of discontinuitiesInversion (geology)MathematicsA priori and a posterioriNull (SQL)Monte Carlo methodParameter spaceStatistical physicsStatisticsMathematical analysisPhysicsGeologyComputer scienceSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The strong uncertainty inherent in the traveltime inversion of first arrivals from surface sources is usually removed by using a priori constraints or regularization. This leads to the null-space (data-independent model variability) being inadequately sampled, and consequently, model uncertainties may be underestimated in traditional (such as checkerboard) resolution tests. To measure the full null-space model uncertainties, we use unconstrained Monte Carlo inversion and examine the statistics of the resulting model ensembles. In an application to 1-D first-arrival traveltime inversion, the τ–p method is used to build a set of models that are equivalent to the IASP91 model within small, ∼0.02 per cent, time deviations. The resulting velocity variances are much larger, ∼2–3 per cent within the regions above the mantle discontinuities, and are interpreted as being due to the null-space. Depth-variant depth averaging is required for constraining the velocities within meaningful bounds, and the averaging scalelength could also be used as a measure of depth resolution. Velocity variances show structure-dependent, negative correlation with the depth-averaging scalelength. Neither the smoothest (Herglotz–Wiechert) nor the mean velocity-depth functions reproduce the discontinuities in the IASP91 model; however, the discontinuities can be identified by the increased null-space velocity (co-)variances. Although derived for a 1-D case, the above conclusions also relate to higher dimensions.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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