Interparameter trade-off quantification for isotropic-elastic full-waveform inversion with various model parameterizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Simultaneous determination of multiple physical parameters using full-waveform inversion (FWI) suffers from interparameter trade-off difficulties. Analyzing the interparameter trade-offs in different model parameterizations of isotropic-elastic FWI, and thus determining the appropriate model parameterization, are critical for efficient inversion and obtaining reliable inverted models. Five different model parameterizations are considered and compared including velocity-density, modulus-density, impedance-density, and two velocity-impedance parameterizations. The scattering radiation patterns are first used for interparameter trade-off analysis. Furthermore, a new framework is developed to evaluate the interparameter trade-off based upon multiparameter Hessian-vector products: Multiparameter point spread functions (MPSFs) and interparameter contamination sensitivity kernels (ICSKs), which provide quantitative, second-order measurements of the interparameter contaminations. In the numerical experiments, the interparameter trade-offs in various model parameterizations are evaluated using the MPSFs and ICSKs. Inversion experiments are carried out with simple Gaussian-anomaly models and a complex Marmousi model. Overall, the parameterization of the P-wave velocity, S-wave velocity, and density, and the parameterization of the P-wave velocity, S-wave velocity, and S-wave impedance perform best for reconstructing all of the physical parameters. Isotropic-elastic FWI of the Hussar low-frequency data set with various model parameterizations verifies our conclusions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".