MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766816162 · doi:10.1002/2017gl075342

Seismic Interferometry Using Persistent Noise Sources for Temporal Subsurface Monitoring

2017· article· en· W2766816162 on OpenAlexafffund
Philippe Dales, Pascal Audet, Gerrit Olivier

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSeismic interferometryMicroseismAmbient noise levelGeologyNoise (video)SeismologySeismic noiseInterferometryBlock (permutation group theory)AcousticsRemote sensingComputer scienceOpticsGeomorphologySound (geography)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In passive source seismology, seismic interferometry typically refers to the cross correlation of ambient noise to construct an estimate of the Green's function between sensors. The presence of persistent natural and/or anthropogenic sources can bias or prevent the retrieval of these estimated Green's functions. Here we show how these strong persistent sources can be used to measure small changes in the medium between a source and either (or both) source‐sensor pairs. The method relies on localizing the sources and using this information to identify and select cross‐correlation functions for each source of interest. We illustrate this method by monitoring growth of a block cave at an underground mine using three nearly continuously operating ore crushers which dominate the wavefield. This technique should work equally well in natural environments using sources such as volcanic tremor, hydrothermal bubble cavitation, and microseisms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207