MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090751014 · doi:10.1190/segam2020-3422085.1

Learning from migration and demigration: A practical approach for fast denoising

2020· article· en· W3090751014 on OpenAlexaff
Chengbo Li, Xi Wang, Yu Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceNoise reductionImage denoisingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Noise is an unavoidable issue in seismic acquisition and processing. In particular with modern land acquisition design trending towards point source, point sensor and high trace density, the raw seismic quality would be further compromised due to the lack of stacking power for individual traces. For decades, many authors have put forward their solutions to cope with noise. Nevertheless, these methods often targeted a single type of noise, such as harmonics or ice-break noise, or noise with similar characters, such as random noise or guided waves. In processing, seismic denoising is often performed in data domains and incorporated into multiple steps to account for different noise characters. Even though most denoising methods are less computationally intensive comparing to velocity model building and imaging, the procedure could be still time consuming with iterations of manual testing, quality control and parameterization. Leveraging migration and demigration, here we propose a learning-based approach for fast denoising with applications to fast-track processing. The method is designed to directly work on raw data without separating each noise type and character. The automatic attenuation of noise is attained by performing migration/demigration guided sparse inversion. By discussing examples from a Permian Basin dataset with very challenging noise issues, we attest the feasibility of this learning-based approach as a fast turnaround alternative to conventional denoising methodology. Presentation Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 Session Start Time: 8:30 AM Presentation Time: 9:45 AM Location: 362D Presentation Type: Oral

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207