MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996538552

Blind Deconvolution of Seismograms Regularized via Minimum Support

2010· article· en· W2996538552 on OpenAlexaff
A. A. Royer, M. G. Bostock, Eldad Haber

Bibliographic record

VenueAGU Fall Meeting Abstracts · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeismogramDeconvolutionConvolution (computer science)Source functionAlgorithmBlind deconvolutionBlind signal separationGaussianMathematicsComputer scienceGeologyPhysicsSeismologyChannel (broadcasting)Artificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The separation of earthquake source signature and propagation effects (the Earth?s ?Green?s function?) that encode a seismogram is a challenging problem in seismology. The task of separating these two effects is called blind deconvolution. By considering seismograms of multiple earthquakes from similar locations recorded at a given station and that therefore share the same Green?s function, we may write a linear relation in the time domain ui(t)*sj(t) ? uj(t)*si(t) = 0, where ui(t) is the seismogram for the ith source and sj(t) is the jth unknown source. The symbol * represents the convolution operator. From two or more seismograms, we obtain a homogeneous linear system where the unknowns are the sources. This system is subject to a scaling constraint to deliver a non-trivial solution. Since source durations are not known a priori and must be determined, we augment our system by introducing the source durations as unknowns and we solve the combined system (sources and source durations) using separation of variables. Our solution is derived using direct linear inversion to recover the sources and Newton?s method to recover source durations. This method is tested using two sets of synthetic seismograms created by convolution of (i) random Gaussian source-time functions and (ii) band-limited sources with a simplified Green?s function and signal to noise levels up to 10% with encouraging 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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAGU Fall Meeting AbstractsSame topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207