Sparse reflectivity inversion for nonstationary seismic data with surface-related multiples: Numerical and field-data experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seismic data are nonstationary due to subsurface anelastic attenuation and dispersion effects. These effects, also referred to as the earth’s [Formula: see text]-filtering effects, can diminish seismic resolution. We previously developed a method of nonstationary sparse reflectivity inversion (NSRI) for resolution enhancement, which avoids the intrinsic instability associated with inverse [Formula: see text] filtering and generates superior [Formula: see text] compensation results. Applying NSRI to data sets that contain multiples (addressing surface-related multiples only) requires a demultiple preprocessing step because NSRI cannot distinguish primaries from multiples and will treat them as interference convolved with incorrect [Formula: see text] values. However, multiples contain information about subsurface properties. To use information carried by multiples, with the feedback model and NSRI theory, we adapt NSRI to the context of nonstationary seismic data with surface-related multiples. Consequently, not only are the benefits of NSRI (e.g., circumventing the intrinsic instability associated with inverse [Formula: see text] filtering) extended, but also multiples are considered. Our method is limited to be a 1D implementation. Theoretical and numerical analyses verify that given a wavelet, the input [Formula: see text] values primarily affect the inverted reflectivities and exert little effect on the estimated multiples; i.e., multiple estimation need not consider [Formula: see text] filtering effects explicitly. However, there are benefits for NSRI considering multiples. The periodicity and amplitude of the multiples imply the position of the reflectivities and amplitude of the wavelet. Multiples assist in overcoming scaling and shifting ambiguities of conventional problems in which multiples are not considered. Experiments using a 1D algorithm on a synthetic data set, the publicly available Pluto 1.5 data set, and a marine data set support the aforementioned findings and reveal the stability, capabilities, and limitations of the proposed method.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".