Source separation for simultaneous towed-streamer marine acquisition — A compressed sensing approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Simultaneous marine acquisition is an economic way to sample seismic data and speed up acquisition, wherein single or multiple source vessels fire sources at near-simultaneous or slightly random times, resulting in overlapping shot records. The current paradigm for simultaneous towed-streamer marine acquisition incorporates “low variability” in source firing times, i.e., 0≤1 or 2 s because the sources and receivers are moving. This results in a low degree of randomness in simultaneous data, which is challenging to separate (into its constituent sources) using compressed-sensing-based separation techniques because randomization is key to successful recovery via compressed sensing. We have addressed the challenge of source separation for simultaneous towed-streamer acquisitions via two compressed-sensing-based approaches, i.e., sparsity promotion and rank minimization. We have evaluated the performance of the sparsity-promotion- and rank-minimization-based techniques by simulating two simultaneous towed-streamer acquisition scenarios, i.e., over/under and simultaneous long offset. A field data example from the Gulf of Suez for the over/under acquisition scenario was also developed. We observed that the proposed approaches gave good and comparable recovery qualities of the separated sources, but the rank-minimization technique outperformed the sparsity-promoting technique in terms of the computational time and memory. We also compared these two techniques with the normal-moveout-based median-filtering-type approach, which had comparable results.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it