MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418655403 · doi:10.1190/geo2015-0372.1

Mitigation of guided wave contamination in waveform tomography of marine seismic reflection data from southwestern Alaska

2016· article· en· W2418655403 on OpenAlexaff
Rajesh Vayavur, Andrew J. Calvert

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyWoods Hole Oceanographic Institution
KeywordsGeologyTomographyWaveformAmplitudeSeismologyInversion (geology)AcousticsOpticsRadarComputer sciencePhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We have applied 2D frequency-domain acoustic waveform tomography to two different sections of a marine seismic reflection line from southwest Alaska: one section with a deep igneous basement overlain by a thick pile of sediments and the other section with a shallow basement and a thin sedimentary cover. We have evaluated the appearance of dispersive guided waves on both sections, and we have determined that with appropriate data preconditioning it is possible to invert the data using 2D acoustic waveform tomography. Where the basement is deep, we first reduced the dispersive wave contamination of the seismic field data by trace editing, band-pass filtering, and careful choice of the data window for inversion. We then tested different objective functions and inversion scheduling before selecting an approach based on the logarithmic phase, which could be followed by joint phase and amplitude inversion. Where the basement is shallow, the starting model itself, which was generated by ray-based first-arrival tomography, generated acoustic guided waves, necessitating the use of an absorbing boundary condition at the free surface. Logarithmic phase inversion was used, but the amplitude inversion did not converge. To invert seismic data from both sections, we used a layer stripping strategy in which the gradient was used at each stage of the inversion process to check the corresponding model updates. Our results were validated by comparison between synthetic and observed waveforms, comparison of residual phase error plots for the initial and final velocity models, and comparison of waveform tomography velocity models with migrated images. Waveform tomography permits interpretation of the subsurface close to the seafloor where reflection images are contaminated by water-layer multiples, and we inferred the existence of a fault zone from a low-velocity anomaly within the igneous basement.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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