MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4241239449 · doi:10.1190/1.2144284

Seismic signatures of two orthogonal sets of vertical microcorrugated fractures

2005· article· en· W4241239449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rodrigo Felício Fuck, Ilya Tsvankin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional fracture-characterization techniques operate with the idealized model of penny-shaped (rotationally invariant) cracks and ignore the roughness (microcorrugation) of fracture surfaces. Here, we develop analytic solutions based on the linear-slip theory to examine wave propagation through an effective triclinic medium that contains two microcorrugated, vertical, orthogonal fracture sets in isotropic background rock. The corrugation of fracture surfaces makes the shear-wave splitting coefficient at vertical incidence sensitive to fluid saturation, especially for tight, low-porosity formations. Also, in contrast to the model with two orthogonal sets of penny-shaped cracks, the NMO (normal-moveout) ellipses of all three reflection modes (P, S1, S2) are rotated with respect to the fracture strike directions. Another unusual property of the fast shear wave S1 is the misalignment of the semi-major axis of its NMO ellipse and the polarization vector at vertical incidence. Our model may adequately describe the orthogonal fracture sets at Weyburn Field in Canada, where the axes of the P-wave NMO ellipse deviate from the S1-wave polarization direction. The results of this work can be used to identify the underlying physical model and, potentially, estimate the combinations of fracture parameters constrained by multiazimuth, multicomponent seismic data.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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