MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4254837538 · doi:10.1190/segam2019-w6-03.1

Focal-time estimation: A new method for stratigraphic depth control of induced seismicity

2019· article· en· W4254837538 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ronald Weir, Andrew Poulin, Nadine Igonin, David W. Eaton, Larry Lines, Don Lawton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduced seismicityMicroseismHypocenterSeismologyGeologyOffset (computer science)GeodesyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this presentation we describe a novel method for focal-depth determination of induced seismic events. Our approach involves joint interpretation of microseismic and induced-seismicity waveform observations along with multicomponent surface seismic data. The method operates using parallel workflows for processing induced-seismicity data and P-P and P-S data. The output is a set of calibrated P-P times for the microseismic events, which thereby enables the events to be co-rendered and visualized with the seismic data, thus providing stratigraphic control on source locations. The method requires Vp and Vs time-depth control from coincident multicomponent seismic data and is achieved by registration of P-P and P-S reflections from equivalent horizons. Hypocenter vertical locations are initially expressed as the zero-offset focal time (2-way P-P reflection time) and then converted to depth by leveraging methods available for time-depth conversion of the surface seismic data, as well as well ties using synthetic seismograms. Application of this method requires high-quality P- and S-wave picks for microseismic events, which are extrapolated to zero offset. This approach avoids the necessity to build and calibrate a 3-D velocity model for hypocenter location, nor determination of accurate absolute origin times. This method also implicitly accounts for factors that are often ill-constrained for most velocity models, e.g. velocity anisotropy, since these factors similarly affect both the induced seismicity and the 3-D seismic travel times. We apply our new method to an induced seismicity dataset with events up to ML3.6, recorded using a shallow-well monitoring array in Alberta, Canada. Reconciling the seismic processing datum with the microseismic datum was found to be a critical, but not insurmountable, challenge. The inferred focal depths place most induced events at, or above, the treatment depth.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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