MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335499120 · doi:10.1071/aseg2013ab149

Chasing Australia’s unconventional resources with point-source, point- receiver, full azimuth surface seismic

2013· article· en· W2335499120 on OpenAlexaff
Anastasia Poole, Peter van Baaren, John Quigley, G. Busanello, Jennifer Badry, C.M. Hobbs, B. Mitchell, D. A. Schmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsHatch (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAzimuthOffset (computer science)Seismic surveyInversion (geology)GeologyVertical seismic profileSeismologySeismic inversionComputer scienceRemote sensingGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seismic methods can be utilized in unconventional resources characterization studies to achieve an improved understanding of the entire reservoir heterogeneity, structure and stress orientation. This assists in an identification of production “sweet spots” and more efficient well placement. To enable this type of study with surface seismic, we need to analyse and invert the data not only against offset but also azimuth. This requirement places greater demands on the seismic than would be the case for a purely structural image.In this paper we will describe the use of a potential “best-practice” solution based on experience in Australia and elsewhere for the design and implementation of the high specification “Winnie 3D” seismic survey. This survey featured broad-band point-sources and point-receivers using a non-linear maximum displacement sweep of 1.5 to 110 Hz. The omni-directional symmetrical dense sampling, in combination with long offsets, resulted in uniform azimuthal coverage and extremely high trace density. This design combined with a broad-band acquisition enables azimuthal analysis, inversion and seismic attributes extraction.We will demonstrate how this 3D design, tailored for unconventional targets, allowed extraction of seismic attributes even in the early stages of data processing, enabling detection of anomalies that could be related to shallow igneous intrusions.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207