MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325216019 · doi:10.1190/segam2012-1424.1

Seismic event parameterization in the Fractional Fourier transform domain

2012· article· en· W2325216019 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Analysis and Transform Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFractional Fourier transformChirpFourier transformKernel (algebra)Frequency domainAlgorithmTime–frequency analysisMathematicsTime domainShort-time Fourier transformSignal processingComputer scienceMathematical analysisFourier analysisPhysicsFilter (signal processing)OpticsDigital signal processingDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many seismic data processing techniques are based on different forms of time-frequency representation of signals. In the Fractional Fourier transform (FRFT), a signal can be represented in multiple domains including time and frequency. This gives an extra degree of freedom in data processing where the conventional Fourier transform (FT) is used. In the FT the kernel is complex sinusoids, whereas in the FRFT the kernel is a set of linear chirps. A parabolic event in the FT-FRFT domain can be modeled as a linear chirp for each frequency. We took advantage of this linear chirp property to separate spatially coherent parabolic events from linear events with a high level of accuracy. The caveat of the FRFT domain filtering is the selection of an optimum set of fractional orders. Relationships among fractional order, frequency, and linear or parabolic event parameter are also discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.303 · 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