MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114945420 · doi:10.1111/1365-2478.13153

Selecting velocity models using Bayesian Information Criterion

2021· preprint· en· W3114945420 on OpenAlexaff
Tomasz Danek, Bartosz Gierlach, Ayiaz Kaderali, Michael A. Slawiński, Theodore Stanoev

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayesian information criterionBayesian probabilityProfiling (computer programming)Computer scienceContext (archaeology)TrajectoryAlgorithmData miningMathematicsMathematical optimizationGeologyArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present a strategy for selecting the values of model parameters by comparing walkaway vertical seismic profiling data with a multilayered model in the context of Bayesian information criterion. We consider P‐wave traveltimes and assume elliptical polar velocity dependence. A model with different propagation speeds, depending on the angle of propagation, can be a good approximation for a medium composed of thin layers. While elliptical anisotropy in a one‐layer model yields good results, an efficient tool for multilayer modelling would provide improved inversion results. To obtain the proper set of velocity values for specific parameterizations, we require two steps of optimization. In the first step, we find the signal trajectory; in the second step, we obtain parameter values by minimizing the misfit between the model and the data. By comparing models and data, we choose the best model in the sense of the Bayesian information criterion.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical ProspectingSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207