MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971588278 · doi:10.1190/geo2019-0099.1

Noise suppression in 2D and 3D seismic data with data-driven sifting algorithms

2019· article· en· W2971588278 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julián L. Gómez, Danilo R. Velis, Juan I. Sabbione

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmDeconvolutionMaxima and minimaComputer scienceFilter (signal processing)Noise (video)ComputationHilbert–Huang transformNoise reductionGeologyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We have developed an empirical-mode decomposition (EMD) algorithm for effective suppression of random and coherent noise in 2D and 3D seismic amplitude data. Unlike other EMD-based methods for seismic data processing, our approach does not involve the time direction in the computation of the signal envelopes needed for the iterative sifting process. Instead, we apply the sifting algorithm spatially in the inline-crossline plane. At each time slice, we calculate the upper and lower signal envelopes by means of a filter whose length is adapted dynamically at each sifting iteration according to the spatial distribution of the extrema. The denoising of a 3D volume is achieved by removing the most oscillating modes of each time slice from the noisy data. We determine the performance of the algorithm by using three public-domain poststack field data sets: one 2D line of the well-known Alaska 2D data set, available from the US Geological Survey; a subset of the Penobscot 3D volume acquired offshore by the Nova Scotia Department of Energy, Canada; and a subset of the Stratton 3D land data from South Texas, available from the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin. The results indicate that random and coherent noise, such as footprint signatures, can be mitigated satisfactorily, enhancing the reflectors with negligible signal leakage in most cases. Our method, called empirical-mode filtering (EMF), yields improved results compared to other 2D and 3D techniques, such as f-x EMD filter, f-x deconvolution, and t-x-y adaptive prediction filtering. EMF exploits the flexibility of EMD on seismic data and is presented as an efficient and easy-to-apply alternative for denoising seismic data with mild to moderate structural complexity.

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 score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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