MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3145667970 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-8524

On the generation of geometry-independent noise models for microseismic monitoring purposes

2021· article· en· W3145667970 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claire Birnie, Matteo Ravasi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSeismology and Earthquake Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoise (video)MicroseismComputer scienceBenchmarkingCovarianceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceSeismologyMathematicsGeologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>As a result of the world-wide interest in carbon storage and geothermal energy production, increased emphasis is nowadays placed on the development of reliable microseismic monitoring techniques for hazard monitoring related to fluid movement and reactivation of faults. In the process of developing and benchmarking these techniques, the incorporation of realistic noise into synthetic datasets is of vital importance to predict their effectiveness once deployed in the real world. Similarly, the recent widespread use of Machine Learning in seismological applications calls for the creation of synthetic seismic datasets that are indistinguishable from the field data to which they will be applied. </p><p>Noise generation procedures can be split into two categories: model-based and data-driven. The distributed surface sources approach is the most common method in the first category: however, it is well-known that this fails to capture the complexity of recorded noise (Dean et al., 2015). Pearce and Barley (1977)’s convolutional approach offers a data-driven procedure that has the ability to accurately capture the frequency content of noise however imposes that noise must be stationary. Birnie et al. (2016)’s covariance-based approach removes the stationarity requirement accurately capturing spatio-temporal characterisations of noise, however, like all other data-driven approaches it is constrained to the survey geometry in which the noise data has been collected. </p><p>In this work, we propose an extension of the covariance-based noise modelling workflow that aims to generate a noise model over a user-defined geometry. The extended workflow comprises of two steps: the first step is responsible for the characterisation of the recorded noise field and the generation of multiple realisations with the same statistical properties, constrained to the original acquisition geometry. Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) is subsequently applied over each time slice of the noise model transforming the model into the desired geometry.</p><p>The workflow is initially validated on synthetically generated noise with a user-defined input covariance matrix. This allows us to prove that the noise statistics (i.e., covariance and variogram) can be kept almost identical between the noise extracted from the synthetic dataset and the various steps of the noise model procedure. The workflow is further applied to the openly available ToC2ME passive dataset from Alberta, Canada consisting of 69 geophones arranged in a pseudo-random pattern. The noise is modelled and transformed into a 56-sensor, gridded array, which is shown to a very close resemblance to the recorded noise field. </p><p>Whilst the importance of using realistic noise in synthetic datasets for benchmarking algorithms or training ML solutions cannot be overstated, the ability to transform such noise models into arbitrary receiver geometries opens up a host of new opportunities in the area of survey design. We argue that by coupling the noise generation and monitoring algorithms, the placement of sensors can be optimized based on the expected microseismic signatures as well as the surrounding noise behaviour. This could be of particular interest for geothermal and CO<sub>2</sub> storage sites where processing plants are likely to be in close proximity to the permanent monitoring stations.</p>

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismology and Earthquake StudiesFrench-language works237,207