MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2206341931 · doi:10.1190/segam2015-5906921.1

Improving shallow water MWD: Offshore Canada case study

2015· article· en· W2206341931 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zheng Chang, Xuhui Luo, Jie Shu, Huifeng Zhu, Mervyn Parry, K.C. Kolb, Yvonne A Paisant-Allen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaves and shallow waterAzimuthAliasingGeologyComputer scienceSubmarine pipelineAperture (computer memory)Marine engineeringRemote sensingReal-time computingAcousticsOpticsTelecommunicationsEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringOceanographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Data from towed streamer surveys in shallow water environments are usually contaminated by different orders of sea floor reflections called water-layer-related multiples (WLRMs). The model-based water-layer demultiple (MWD) method effectively removes WLRMs. The initial development of 2D MWD was followed by a 3D implementation to better handle out-of-plane WLRMs. This 3D implementation was further improved by using a selective-input strategy to handle the inconsistency of the high-frequency multiple patterns between adjacent sail lines and shots. Time-variant aperture scheme is proposed based on multiple contribution gathers (MCGs) to include sufficient large apertures, avoid aliasing problems, and compensate for apex shifting. Using narrow azimuth towed streamer (NATS) data from the Hibernia field, we demonstrate the benefit of selective-input MWD with time-variant apertures for attenuating WLRMs in shallow water data.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.211
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 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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