MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971355877 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201901010

Microseismic Data Reconstruction and Location Based on Bayesian Non-Parametric Dictionary Learning

2019· article· en· W2971355877 on OpenAlexaff
Cedegao E. Zhang, Mirko van der Baan

Bibliographic record

Venue81st EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2019 · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroseismComputer scienceNoise (video)Event (particle physics)Parametric statisticsSIGNAL (programming language)Missing dataArtificial intelligenceBayesian probabilityGibbs samplingPattern recognition (psychology)Signal reconstructionData miningAlgorithmSignal processingMachine learningMathematicsStatisticsGeologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Microseismic data reconstruction is a procedure to compensate for acquisition deficiencies, and to improve data quality, which is very important for subsequent processing steps, such as event location. Some reconstruction algorithms depend on some parameter settings and ignore the strong noise interference, which may not work well for low quality surface microseismic data. In this paper, we propose to use a Bayesian non-parametric dictionary learning method to recover microseismic signal from the noisy data with missing traces. In the proposed method, the beta-Bernoulli process is employed as a prior for learning an appropriate dictionary to sparsely represent microseismic signals. An approximation to the full posterior is manifested via Gibbs sampling, yielding an ensemble of dictionary and sparse coefficients. Finally, the signal of interest is reconstructed by the product of dictionary and sparse coefficients. Tests on synthetic and real microseismic data demonstrate that the proposed method works very well for low signal-to-noise ratio data with missing traces. We also show how the proposed method benefits reverse time migration based event location.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue81st EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2019Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207