MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161296226 · doi:10.1190/1.2957894

Recent applications of turning-ray tomography

2008· article· en· W2161296226 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xianhuai Zhu, Paul A. Valasek, Baishali Roy, Simon Shaw, Jack Howell, Steve Whitney, Norman Daniel Whitmore, Phil D. Anno

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAzimuthGeologyTomographyTransverse isotropyAnisotropyPrestackSeismologySeismic tomographyVector fieldIsotropyGeometryOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent applications of 2D and 3D turning-ray tomography show that near-surface velocities are important for structural imaging and reservoir characterization. For structural imaging, we used turning-ray tomography to estimate the near-surface velocities for static corrections followed by prestack time migration and the near-surface velocities for prestack depth migration. Two-dimensional acoustic finite-difference modeling illustrates that wave-equation prestack depth migration is very sensitive to the near-surface velocities. Field data demonstrate that turning-ray tomography followed by prestack time migration helps to produce superior images in complex geologic settings. When the near-surface velocity model is integrated into a background velocity model for prestack depth migration, we find that wave propagation is very sensitive to the velocities immediately below the topography. For shallow-reservoir characterization, we developed and applied azimuthal turning-ray tomography to investigate observed apparent azimuthal-traveltime variations, using a wide-azimuth land seismic survey from a heavy-oil field at Surmont, Canada. We found that the apparent azimuthal velocity variations are not necessarily related to azimuthal anisotropy, or horizontal transverse isotropy (HTI), induced by the stress field or fractures. Near-surface heterogeneity and the acquisition footprint also could result in apparent azimuthal variations.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations46
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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