MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771821181 · doi:10.1190/geo2017-0563.1

Edge-preserving smoothing for simultaneous-source full-waveform inversion model updates in high-contrast velocity models

2017· article· en· W2771821181 on OpenAlexaff
Amsalu Y. Anagaw, Mauricio D. Sacchi

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEdge-preserving smoothingSmoothingClassification of discontinuitiesAlgorithmQuadratic equationRegularization (linguistics)PiecewiseFilter (signal processing)Computer scienceInverse problemMathematical optimizationMathematicsBilateral filterGeometryImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMathematical analysisComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Full-waveform inversion (FWI) can provide accurate estimates of subsurface model parameters. In spite of its success, the application of FWI in areas with high-velocity contrast remains a challenging problem. Quadratic regularization methods are often adopted to stabilize inverse problems. Unfortunately, edges and sharp discontinuities are not adequately preserved by quadratic regularization techniques. Throughout the iterative FWI method, an edge-preserving filter, however, can gently incorporate sharpness into velocity models. For every point in the velocity model, edge-preserving smoothing assigns the average value of the most uniform window neighboring the point. Edge-preserving smoothing generates piecewise-homogeneous images with enhanced contrast at boundaries. We adopt a simultaneous-source frequency-domain FWI, based on quasi-Newton optimization, in conjunction with an edge-preserving smoothing filter to retrieve high-contrast velocity models. The edge-preserving smoothing filter gradually removes the artifacts created by simultaneous-source encoding. We also have developed a simple model update to prevent disrupting the convergence of the optimization algorithm. Finally, we perform tests to examine our algorithm.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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