MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206567543 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggab505

A regularization by denoising (RED) scheme for 3-D FWI model updates in large-contrast media

2021· article· en· W4206567543 on OpenAlexafffund
Amsalu Y. Anagaw, Mauricio D. Sacchi

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTotal variation denoisingRegularization (linguistics)Classification of discontinuitiesBackus–Gilbert methodAlgorithmInverse problemQuadratic equationSmoothingNoise reductionSeismogramMathematical optimizationComputer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematicsGeologyRegularization perspectives on support vector machinesSeismologyTikhonov regularizationGeometryMathematical analysisArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Full waveform inversion (FWI) endeavours to estimate high-resolution physical properties of subsurface structures. The technique minimizes the data misfit between observed and modelled seismograms. Despite its success, the application of FWI in areas with high-velocity contrasts remains a challenging problem. Often, quadratic regularization methods are chosen to stabilize inverse problems. Unfortunately, quadratic regularization does not preserve edges and sharp discontinuities adequately. Conversely, a regularization term that uses the l1 norm of the gradient of model parameters can preserve discontinuities. The latter leads to edge-preserving methods based on total variation regularization. This work adopts the framework named regularization by denoising (RED) to solve the FWI problem in high-contrast media. The RED technique only requires an image denoising engine, which, in our case, is a modified weighted total variation filter. One advantage of adopting the RED algorithm for solving FWI problems is its simplicity in the numerical implementation and selection of trade-off parameters. We have benchmarked our algorithm via the 2-D BP/EAGE model, a model with significant velocity contrasts and complex salt bodies. We have also tested the proposed regularization method with the 3-D SEG/EAGE overthrust P-wave velocity model. We also compare the proposed RED method and FWI with total variation regularization.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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