3D Anisotropic Full Waveform Modeling with an Enhanced OASES Workflow for Complex Source-receiver Geometries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary We examine the OASES program code as a potential alternative to wave propagation modeling techniques in microseismic research. We provide an overview on the mathematics and the numerics of OASES, which uses wavenumber integration and the Direct Global Matrix solution technique to model wave propagation in horizontally layered media. In order the increase the usability of OASES for complex source-receiver geometries, we introduce a predominantly automatic enhanced OASES workflow. This workflow is applied to two three-dimensional anisotropic full waveform modeling tests. In the first test, we compare synthetic seismograms computed with OASES to results from two previous studies by the PHASE consortium, which modeled wave propagation with a ray tracing algorithm and the finite difference method respectively. The comparison shows an excellent consistency between all three modeling techniques. The second test compares synthetic seismograms computed with OASES to picked wave arrivals from a microseismic dataset from the Horn River Basin in Canada. The consistency between the modeled and picked wave arrivals is satisfactory for most events, but indicates the necessity of further improvements on the provided velocity model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".