MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618987017 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201700594

Shear Wave Reconstruction from Low Cost Randomized Acquisition

2017· article· en· W2618987017 on OpenAlex
Ali M. Alfaraj, Rajiv Kumar, Felix J. Herrmann

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData acquisitionInterpolation (computer graphics)Shear wavesLongitudinal waveGeologyShear (geology)Sampling (signal processing)Computer scienceAcousticsGeodesyWave propagationComputer visionFilter (signal processing)PhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Shear waves travel in the subsurface at a lower speed compared with compressional waves. Therefore, much finer spatial sampling is required to properly record the shear waves. This leads to higher acquisition costs which are typically avoided by designing surveys geared towards only compressional waves imaging. We propose using randomly under-sampled ocean bottom acquisition designs for recording both compressional and shear waves. The recorded multicomponent data is then interpolated using an SVD-free low rank interpolation scheme that is feasible for large scale seismic data volumes to obtain finely sampled data. Following that, we perform elastic wavefield decomposition at the ocean bottom to recover accurate up- and dow-going S-waves. Synthetic data results indicate that using randomized under-sampled acquisition, we can recover accurate S-waves with an economical cost compared with conventional acquisition designs.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.201 · 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