MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617666381 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201701433

A Model Based Data Driven Dictionary Learning for Seismic Data Representation

2017· article· en· W2617666381 on OpenAlexaff
Can Evren Yarman, Rajiv Kumar, James Rickett

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFourier transformScalingAlgorithmInterpolation (computer graphics)MathematicsGaussianKernel (algebra)Applied mathematicsComputer scienceMathematical analysisArtificial intelligenceGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary In this work, we consider a space-time variable signal cone to model seismic data. The signal cone variability 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 for 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 nonlinear optimization problem which we address by a fixed point method that utilizes a variable projection method with $ell_{1}$ constraints on the linear parameters and other constraints on the nonlinear parameters. We observe that slow decay and oscillatory behavior of the kernel for C-limited functions constitute bottlenecks for the optimization 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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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