MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2811064868 · doi:10.1190/geo2017-0782.1

A denoising framework for microseismic and reflection seismic data based on block matching

2018· article· en· W2811064868 on OpenAlexafffund
Chao Zhang, Mirko van der Baan

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMicroseismic Industry Consortium
KeywordsNoise reductionMicroseismComputer scienceNoise (video)Block (permutation group theory)Matching (statistics)SIGNAL (programming language)Synthetic dataReflection (computer programming)Pattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmData miningArtificial intelligenceGeologySeismologyImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Microseismic and seismic data with a low signal-to-noise ratio affect the accuracy and reliability of processing results and their subsequent interpretation. Thus, denoising is of great importance. We have developed an effective denoising framework for surface (micro)-seismic data using block matching. The novel idea of the proposed framework is to enhance coherent features by grouping similar 2D data blocks into 3D data arrays. The high similarities in the 3D data arrays benefit any filtering strategy suitable for multidimensional noise suppression. We test the performance of this framework on synthetic and field data with different noise levels. The results demonstrate that the block-matching-based framework achieves state-of-the-art denoising performance in terms of incoherent-noise attenuation and signal preservation.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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