MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2330230203 · doi:10.1190/1.3255445

Least‐squares migration with dip‐field regularization: Application to 3D VSP data

2009· article· en· W2330230203 on OpenAlexaff
W. Scott Leaney, Mauricio D. Sacchi, Tadeusz J. Ulrych

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)Least-squares function approximationComputer scienceField (mathematics)GeologyArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Least-squares migration purports to mitigate the impact of irregular acquisition geometries and limited aperture. These are both common problems with multi-offset VSP surveys, so it makes sense that a least-squares approach should be beneficial to VSP imaging. While iterative least-squares migration implementations are expensive for 3D surface seismic data volumes, even comparatively large 3DVSP surveys are small enough to consider a full, iterative least-squares migration. In this paper we review least-squares migration and include a regularization term containing information about the image dip field. This approach allows migration artifacts to be suppressed while fitting the data. The conjugate gradient algorithm is used to solve the inverse problem, and to speed up convergence a preconditioning is used that contains true amplitude weights such as geometrical spreading, constant frequency Q attenuation and angle-dependent scattering. We use a Kirchhoff-type vector implementation with a VTI ray trace kernel and demonstrate resolution improvement and artifacts suppression on synthetic 2D and 3D VSP data.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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