Three‐term amplitude‐versus‐offset (avo) inversion revisited by curvelet and wavelet transforms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a new method to stabilize the three-term AVO inversion using Curvelet and Wavelet transforms. Curvelets are basis functions that effectively represent otherwise smooth objects having discontinuities along smooth curves. The applied formalism explores them to make the most of the continuity along reflectors in seismic images. Combined with Wavelets, Curvelets are used to denoise the data by penalizing high frequencies and small contributions in the AVO-cube. This approach is based on the idea that rapid amplitude changes along the ray-parameter axis are most likely due to noise. The AVO-inverse problem is linearized, formulated and solved for all (x, z) at once. Using densities and velocities of the Marmousi model to define the fluctuations in the elastic properties, the performance of the proposed method is studied and compared with the smoothing along the ray-parameter direction only. We show that our method better approximates the true data after the denoising step, especially when noise level increases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".