MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2931992795 · doi:10.1111/1365-2478.12792

Direct migration of ambient seismic data

2019· article· en· W2931992795 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aaron Girard, Jeffrey Shragge

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Western Australia
KeywordsDeconvolutionAmbient noise levelGeologyGeophysical imagingSeismologyEnergy (signal processing)Passive seismicSeismic noiseReflection (computer programming)Seismic migrationSynthetic dataEnvironmental geologyAmplitudeGeophysicsRemote sensingComputer scienceAlgorithmOpticsPhysicsTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Utilising ambient seismic energy naturally propagating in the Earth as an alternative approach to active body‐wave seismic investigations has been a topic of interest for a number of decades. However, because ambient surface‐wave arrivals typically are of much greater amplitude than ambient body‐wave energy, significant data signal processing and long recording times are required to mitigate this and other coherent noise sources, and to correlate sufficient reflected body‐wave energy to converge to a stable image. Even for these scenarios, identifying and validating imaged body‐wave reflection events remain challenging. In active‐source investigations, extended imaging condition gathers are used to examine velocity (in)accuracy. Herein, we develop an ambient direct migration approach that uses a novel ambient (deconvolution) extended imaging condition. We simulate synthetic ambient‐wavefield seismic data for two different models and use a field data set from Lalor Lake in Manitoba, Canada, to conduct a series of numerical experiments to demonstrate the velocity sensitivity and long‐term stationarity of ambient‐wavefield seismic data in the migration image domain. Tests with varying global velocity perturbations show a characteristic reflector moveout in deconvolution extended imaging condition gathers that can serve as a diagnostic of reflected ambient body‐wave energy. We illustrate that this imaging formalism, under idealised circumstances, gives comparable results to conventional seismic methods, which extends the use of extended imaging condition gather‐based image validation to ambient‐wavefield seismic data scenarios. We assert that this may be a valuable tool for the validation of ambient migration techniques that to date have yielded largely inconclusive results.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical ProspectingSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207