MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160244801 · doi:10.1002/2013jb010692

Shear wave seismic interferometry for lithospheric imaging: Application to southern Mexico

2014· article· en· W2160244801 on OpenAlexaff
J. Frank, Elmer Ruigrok, Kees Wapenaar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsShell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySeismic interferometrySeismologyShear zoneInterferometryShear (geology)Receiver functionLithospherePassive seismicSeismometerSubductionRemote sensingGeodesyOpticsTectonicsPhysicsPetrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Seismic interferometry allows for the creation of new seismic traces by cross correlating existing ones. With sufficient sampling of remote‐source positions, it is possible to create a virtual source record by transforming a receiver location into a virtual source. The imaging technique developed here directly retrieves reflectivity information from the subsurface. Other techniques, namely receiver‐function and tomography, rely on mode‐converted energy and perturbations in a velocity field, respectively, to make inferences regarding structure. We select shear phases as an imaging source because of their lower propagation velocity, sensitivity to melt, and ability to treat vertical shear and horizontal shear wavefields independently. Teleseismic shear phases approximate a plane wave due to the extent of wavefront spread compared to a finite receiver array located on the free surface. The teleseismic shear phase transmission responses are used as input to the seismic interferometry technique. We create virtual shear source records by converting each receiver in the array into a virtual source. By cross correlating the received signals, the complex source character of distant earthquakes is imprinted on the virtual source records as the average autocorrelation of individual source‐time functions. We demonstrate a technique that largely removes this imprint by filtering in the common‐offset domain. A field data set was selected from the Meso‐America Subduction Experiment. Despite the suboptimal remote‐source sampling, an image of the lithosphere was produced that confirms features of the subduction zone that were previously found with the receiver‐function technique.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid EarthSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207