MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091496164 · doi:10.1190/segam2020-3426928.1

Data-driven time-lapse acquisition design via optimal receiver-source placement and reconstruction

2020· article· en· W3091496164 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yi Guo, Mauricio D. Sacchi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData acquisitionGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PreviousNext No AccessSEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2020Data-driven time-lapse acquisition design via optimal receiver-source placement and reconstructionAuthors: Yi GuoMauricio D. SacchiYi GuoUniversity of Alberta and Mauricio D. SacchiUniversity of Albertahttps://doi.org/10.1190/segam2020-3426928.1 SectionsSupplemental MaterialAboutPDF/ePub ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail AbstractWe investigate a recently proposed method for optimal sensor placement that we have adapted for a time-lapse seismic acquisition application. The premise of our paper is that a dense acquisition conducted for the base survey can be used to design an optimal sparse acquisition geometry for the monitor survey. The method uses Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) to extract the basis from the training dataset. The base survey provides the training dataset to estimate the POD. Instead of using a conventional universal basis, the POD basis extracted from the base survey provides a data representation that is particularly tailored to seismic data reconstruction. We determine the optimal acquisition geometry for the monitor survey via dimensionality reduction and QR factorization with column pivoting. Pivoting permits to determine the optimal source and receiver geometry for the monitor survey. Once the optimal geometry is estimated, the least-squares fitting of the POD basis is used for reconstructing the monitor survey. We also provide a comparison between random sampling followed by reconstruction and the proposed method.Presentation Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2020Session Start Time: 8:30 AMPresentation Time: 10:35 AMLocation: 362APresentation Type: OralKeywords: acquisition, reconstruction, sensors, time-lapse, survey designPermalink: https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2020-3426928.1FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2020ISSN (print):1052-3812 ISSN (online):1949-4645Copyright: 2020 Pages: 3887 publication data© 2020 Published in electronic format with permission by the Society of Exploration GeophysicistsPublisher:Society of Exploration Geophysicists HistoryPublished: 25 Sep 2020 CITATION INFORMATION Yi Guo and Mauricio D. Sacchi, (2020), "Data-driven time-lapse acquisition design via optimal receiver-source placement and reconstruction," SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts : 66-70. https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2020-3426928.1 Plain-Language Summary Keywordsacquisitionreconstructionsensorstime-lapsesurvey designPDF DownloadLoading ...

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207