MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220953072 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu22-10995

Seismic attributes in unconsolidated near-surface sediments

2022· preprint· en· W4220953072 on OpenAlexaff
B Dietiker, Kevin Brewer, Timothy Cartwright, H Crow, A J -M Pugin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyReflection (computer programming)Surface waveShear (geology)SeismologySeismic waveSinkholeMineralogyPetrologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The calculation, analysis and interpretation of seismic attributes is an important tool in reservoir seismology and has been used since the 1950’s to improve the characterization of oil and gas fields around the world. Recent applications of seismic attributes in the near surface use the coherency attribute to detect faults as well as average and normalized frequencies and similarity to map ground instability and image sinkholes. Seismic attributes are also used to assess unconsolidated oil sand reservoirs, to evaluate ocean/lake bottom responses from unconsolidated sediments, and to visualize the internal structure of mass transport deposits. In unconsolidated near-surface sediments seismic attributes are rarely used. This is likely due to the high variability present in the near surface. Combined P-/S-attributes are difficult to obtain because of the large difference between P-wave and S-wave velocity, as well as frequency and resolution. Therefore, the most important step to obtain these combined attributes is performing depth conversions for the P- and S-wave reflection profiles that perfectly match horizons and features in the depth domain. We present commonly used attributes calculated from a shear-wave reflection profile imaging the dome structure of an esker. Attributes calculated from the compressional-wave reflections are compared to the shear-wave attributes which benefit from higher resolution than P-wave attributes. We highlight the attributes which best enhance the general subsurface structure and list new information gained from different attributes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques→French-language works237,207→