MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2189249750

Static corrections via raypath interferometry: recent field experience

2014· article· en· W2189249750 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David C. Henley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaticsInterferometrySeismic interferometryConsistency (knowledge bases)Reflection (computer programming)GeologyDeconvolutionGeodesyOpticsMathematicsAlgorithmComputer scienceGeometryPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Raypath interferometry is a processing technique developed to address problems encountered with conventional static corrections methods in areas where basic assumptions used by these methods are violated. It introduces the ‘raypath-consistency’ concept to generalize the usual ‘surface-consistency’ constraint used in conventional statics methods; and it uses interferometry concepts to accommodate uncertain or non-discrete reflection arrivals by replacing event picking and time shifting with crosscorrelation and deconvolution. Raypath interferometry was first successfully applied to a high-resolution seismic line in the MacKenzie Delta, for which surface-consistency was violated by the high-velocity permafrost surface layer, and which manifested instances of multipath arrivals, which contaminate the primary reflection arrivals. Although developed primarily to handle problem lines like the MacKenzie Delta line, raypath interferometry is a generally applicable technique which works equally well on data for which conventional statics methods are also successful. We demonstrate this using a recent 3C seismic survey from the Hussar, Alberta area. Furthermore, we demonstrate raypath interferometry on the radial component (PS) of these data, where the large shear-wave statics appear to be non-stationary.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques→French-language works237,207→