MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806046626 · doi:10.1071/aj17229

Full waveform inversion: early start of model building process to resolve the complex near surface model in the Exmouth sub-basin, North West Shelf Australia

2018· article· en· W2806046626 on OpenAlexaff
Lianping Zhang, Haryo Trihutomo, Yuelian Gong, Bee Jik Lim, Alexander Karvelas

Bibliographic record

VenueThe APPEA Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Research (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverburdenWorkflowGeologyInversion (geology)Structural basinPreprocessorComputer scienceSeismologyMining engineeringPaleontologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Schlumberger Multiclient Exmouth 3D survey was acquired over the Exmouth sub-basin, North West Shelf Australia and covers 12 600 km2. One of the primary objectives of this survey was to produce a wide coverage of high quality imaging with advanced processing technology within an agreed turnaround time. The complexity of the overburden was one of the imaging challenges that impacted the structuration and image quality at the reservoir level. Unlike traditional full-waveform inversion (FWI) workflow, here, FWI was introduced early in the workflow in parallel with acquisition and preprocessing to produce a reliable near surface velocity model from a smooth starting model. FWI derived an accurate and detailed near surface model, which subsequently benefitted the common image point (CIP) tomography model updates through to the deeper intervals. The objective was to complete the FWI model update for the overburden concurrently with the demultiple stages hence reflection time CIP tomography could start with a reasonably good velocity model upon completion of the demultiple process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe APPEA JournalSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207