MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317511584 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201413209

Full Model Wavenumber Inversion (FMWI)

2015· article· en· W2317511584 on OpenAlexaff
Tariq Alkhalifah

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWavenumberResidualInversion (geology)Fourier transformA priori and a posterioriMathematical analysisAlgorithmMathematicsPhysicsGeologyOpticsSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A model of the Earth can be described using a Fourier basis represented by its wavenumber components. In full waveform inversion (FWI), our ultimate objective is to access all the available model wavenumbers in the recorded data that are not already accurately present in the initial velocity model. In inverting for these model wavenumbers, it is important to locate their imprint in the data. To achieve this, I review the relation between the model wavenumber buildup and the inversion process. Specifically, I emphasize a focus on the model wavenumber components and identify their individual influence on the data. Missing the energy for a single vertical low wavenumber from the residual model between the true Marmousi model and some initial linearly increasing velocity model produces a worse least-square fit to the data than the initial model it self where all the residual model wavenumbers are missing. This extreme realization demonstrates the importance of the low model wavenumbers in utilizing the higher wavenumbers, especially those attained in an order dictated by a scattering angle filter. A numerical Marmousi example demonstrates the important role that a scattering angle filter plays in managing the continuation process from low to high model wavenumbers.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.224
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 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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