MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091387160 · doi:10.1190/geo2019-0781.1

Improving the resolution of impedance inversion in karst systems by incorporating diffraction information: A case study of Tarim Basin, China

2020· article· en· W3091387160 on OpenAlexaff
Kun Xiang, Linghe Han, Ziduo Hu, Evgeny Landa

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)KarstGeologyElectrical impedanceDiffractionInverse transform samplingTarim basinStructural basinComputer scienceGeomorphologySurface waveOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Different scales of voids and cavities in karst systems demonstrate considerable potential as exploration targets in the Tarim Basin, northwest China. Numerous diffraction events exist in the seismic data above the karst reservoir in this area because of the strong impedance contrast and irregular shape of voids. The conventional impedance inversion method using migrated data as an input cannot easily estimate the location of voids and the impedance inside the voids. In this case, an alternative approach to impedance inversion that considers the diffractive component of the total wavefield and uses the unmigrated data as an input should be used. The inversion consists of a least-squares minimization of the misfit function between the observed and modeled data. Forward modeling incorporates a combination of reflection and diffraction wavefield components. The adopted method is applied to physical modeling and field data recorded above the karst reservoir. This study’s physical modeling test simulates observed field data and is performed using a high-resolution and high-fidelity 3D modeling system. Inversion results obtained by the proposed and conventional methods are compared. Physical modeling and a field data application show that the adopted impedance inversion method improves the karst location estimation and the acoustic impedance within the voids.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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