MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Formulation of the linearized forward problems for multicomponent OBS data in a water/solid configuration using the reciprocity theorem

2000· article· en· W2160152091 on OpenAlexaff
Luc T. Ikelle, Lasse Amundsen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsPetroleum Technology Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeophoneReciprocity (cultural anthropology)SeismogramMathematical analysisMathematicsPhysicsGeophysicsGeologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As is the case with other geophysical data, the interpretation of multicomponent data from the new ocean bottom seismic (OBS) acquisition system requires a solution to the forward problem of predicting seismograms. Born approximation (a single-scattering approximation) is one of the classical tools used for solving forward problems. The adaptation of this solution to OBS data requires (1) the explicit introduction of the boundary conditions at a water/solid interface, (2) the use of the reciprocity theorem in a fluid/solid configuration and (3) the use of P- and S- wave potentials. We present a formulation of the linearized forward problem for predicting multicomponent OBS data using Born approximation and the reciprocity theorem. The results of our formulation are valid for pressure data (hydrophone data) as well as particle velocity data (geophone data). Specific cases where particle velocity data are cast into P- and S- wave potentials are also treated. For these scenarios, the background medium and the scatterer are considered arbitrarily anisotropic and heterogeneous.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations5
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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