MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2329912795 · doi:10.1190/1.3513497

Solving least squares Kirchhoff migration using multigrid methods

2010· article· en· W2329912795 on OpenAlexaff
Abdolnaser Yousefzadeh, John C. Bancroft

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultigrid methodComputer scienceLeast-squares function approximationApplied mathematicsMathematicsMathematical analysisStatisticsPartial differential equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to attenuate the migration artifacts and increase the special resolution of the subsurface reflectivity, conventional migration may be replaced by the least squares migration (LSM). However, this is a costly procedure. To reduce the cost, the feasibility of using the multigrid methods in solving the linear system of prestack Kirchhoff LSM equation is investigated. This study showed that the conventional method of multigrid is not viable to solve Kirchhoff LSM equation for at least two reasons. The main reason is that the Hessian matrix is not a diagonally dominant matrix. Therefore, the conventional iterative solvers of the multigrid are not effective. The performance of Conjugate Gradient (CG) multigrid is discussed. It is shown that since CG does not have a smoothing property, it should not be considered as an effective multigrid iterative solver. Using the CG as an iterative solver for the multigrid may slightly reduces the number of iterations for the same rate of convergence in the CG itself. However, it does not reduce the total computational cost.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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