MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123670553 · doi:10.1190/geo2020-0312.1

Physics-guided deep learning for seismic inversion with hybrid training and uncertainty analysis

2021· article· en· W3123670553 on OpenAlexafffund
Jian Sun, K. A. Innanen, Chao Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInversion (geology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningArtificial neural networkResidualSynthetic dataSet (abstract data type)Machine learningAlgorithmSeismologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The determination of subsurface elastic property models is crucial in quantitative seismic data processing and interpretation. This problem is commonly solved by deterministic physical methods, such as tomography or full-waveform inversion. However, these methods are entirely local and require accurate initial models. Deep learning represents a plausible class of methods for seismic inversion, which may avoid some of the issues of purely descent-based approaches. However, any generic deep learning network capable of relating each elastic property cell value to each sample in a seismic data set would require a very large number of degrees of freedom. Two approaches might be taken to train such a network: first, by invoking a massive and exhaustive training data set and, second, by working to reduce the degrees of freedom by enforcing physical constraints on the model-data relationship. The second approach is referred to as “physics-guiding.” Based on recent progress in wave theory-designed (i.e., physics-based) networks, we have developed a hybrid network design, involving deterministic, physics-based modeling and data-driven deep learning components. From an optimization standpoint, a data-driven model misfit (i.e., standard deep learning) and now a physics-guided data residual (i.e., a wave propagation network) are simultaneously minimized during the training of the network. An experiment is carried out to analyze the trade-off between two types of losses. Synthetic velocity building is used to examine the potential of hybrid training. Comparisons demonstrate that, given the same training data set, the hybrid-trained network outperforms the traditional fully data-driven network. In addition, we perform a comprehensive error analysis to quantitatively compare the fully data-driven and hybrid physics-guided approaches. The network is applied to the SEG salt model data, and the uncertainty is analyzed, to further examine the benefits of hybrid training.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
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

Citations130
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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