MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259592256 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201412881

True-amplitude Layer-stripping Common-shot Acoustic RTM

2015· article· en· W2259592256 on OpenAlexaff
Yongpeng Qin, M. Okoniewski

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsAcceleware (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmplitudeShot (pellet)Stripping (fiber)AcousticsWaveformLayer (electronics)OpticsComputer scienceMaterials sciencePhysicsTelecommunicationsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Layer-stripping RTM can dramatically improve the efficiency of iterative RTM for salt model building and updating sub-salt velocity. One key issue for layer-stripping RTM is to properly inject the redatumed source and receiver wavefields for each shot. In this paper, we present a new formulation for injecting redatumed source and receiver wavefields into the acoustic model for finite-difference method while preserving their relative amplitude. By combining this amplitude-preserved injection of redatumed wavefields with regular true-amplitude common-shot RTM, we develop a true-amplitude layer-stripping common-shot acoustic RTM. Quantitative comparison of shot images using synthetic and field data examples shows that the proposed true-amplitude layer-stripping acoustic RTM gives nearly identical shot images to regular true-amplitude common-shot acoustic RTM.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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