A model‐based data‐driven dictionary learning for seismic data representation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Planar waves events recorded in a seismic array can be represented as lines in the Fourier domain. However, in the real world, seismic events usually have curvature or amplitude variability, which means that their Fourier transforms are no longer strictly linear but rather occupy conic regions of the Fourier domain that are narrow at low frequencies but broaden at high frequencies where the effect of curvature becomes more pronounced. One can consider these regions as localised “signal cones”. In this work, we consider a space–time variable signal cone to model the seismic data. The variability of the signal cone is obtained through scaling, slanting, and translation of the kernel for cone‐limited (C‐limited) functions (functions whose Fourier transform lives within a cone) or C‐Gaussian function (a multivariate function whose Fourier transform decays exponentially with respect to slowness and frequency), which constitutes our dictionary. We find a discrete number of scaling, slanting, and translation parameters from a continuum by optimally matching the data. This is a non‐linear optimisation problem, which we address by a fixed‐point method that utilises a variable projection method with ℓ 1 constraints on the linear parameters and bound constraints on the non‐linear parameters. We observe that slow decay and oscillatory behaviour of the kernel for C‐limited functions constitute bottlenecks for the optimisation problem, which we partially overcome by the C‐Gaussian function. We demonstrate our method through an interpolation example. We present the interpolation result using the estimated parameters obtained from the proposed method and compare it with those obtained using sparsity‐promoting curvelet decomposition, matching pursuit Fourier interpolation, and sparsity‐promoting plane‐wave decomposition methods.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".