MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740920393 · doi:10.1190/tle36080640.1

Introduction to this special section: Impact of compressive sensing on seismic data acquisition and processing

2017· article· en· W2740920393 on OpenAlexaff
Norm Allegar, Felix J. Herrmann, Charles C. Mosher

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAzimuthSection (typography)Data acquisitionSpecial sectionChannel (broadcasting)Field (mathematics)Computer scienceData processingVolume (thermodynamics)GeologyRemote sensingTelecommunicationsDatabaseEngineeringOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last 30 years have seen ever-increasing amounts of seismic data being acquired. It is now common to see 12 or more streamers deployed with a single seismic vessel, ocean-bottom sensors deployed by the thousands, or land surveys with channel counts into the many tens of thousands. The volume of data has been defined not only by the sensor density but also by the number of components recorded at each location. Radial data coverage has grown from narrow azimuth to multiazimuth to wide azimuth to full azimuth. A higher sensor count has only been a part of the data explosion story. Source effort has evolved as well, with continuous recording and a variety of simultaneous-source schemes being utilized. Data density and field effort have grown, and continue to grow, with the imaging and interpretational demands of the industry.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.014

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207