MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2263689098 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201413086

Using Common Information in Compressive Time-lapse Full-waveform Inversion

2015· article· en· W2263689098 on OpenAlexaff
Felix Oghenekohwo, Rajiv Kumar, Ernie Esser, Felix J. Herrmann

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)ExploitComputer scienceWaveformAlgorithmGeologySeismologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The use of time-lapse seismic data to monitor changes in the subsurface has become standard practice in industry. In addition, full-waveform inversion has also been extended to time-lapse seismic to obtain useful time-lapse information. The computational cost of this method are becoming more pronounced as the volume of data increases. Therefore, it is necessary to develop fast inversion algorithms that can also give improved time-lapse results. Rather than following existing joint inversion algorithms, we are motivated by a joint recovery model which exploits the common information among the baseline and monitor data. We propose a joint inversion framework, leveraging ideas from distributed compressive sensing and the modified Gauss-Newton method for full-waveform inversion, by using the shared information in the time-lapse data. Our results on a realistic synthetic example highlight the benefits of our joint inversion approach over a parallel inversion method that does not exploit the shared information. Preliminary results also indicate that our formulation can address time-lapse data with inconsistent acquisition geometries.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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