MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307168624 · doi:10.1190/geo2021-0470.1

Hierarchical transfer learning for deep learning velocity model building

2022· article· en· W4307168624 on OpenAlexafffund
Jérome Simon, Gabriel Fabien‐Ouellet, Erwan Gloaguen, Ishan D. Khurjekar

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSociety of Economic Geologists Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)AlgorithmArtificial neural networkDeep learningSimilarity (geometry)Mean squared errorModel buildingConvergence (economics)Artificial intelligenceTransfer of learningSalientInverseInversion (geology)Measure (data warehouse)Data miningMathematicsImage (mathematics)GeologyGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Deep learning is a promising approach to velocity model building because it has the potential of processing large seismic surveys with minimal resources. By leveraging large quantities of model-gather pairs, neural networks (NNs) can automatically map data to the model space, directly providing a solution to the inverse problem. Such mapping requires big data, which proves prohibitive for 2D and 3D surveys of realistic size. We have developed a transfer learning (TL) strategy. A network is first trained on a smaller subproblem, which then becomes the starting solution to a larger, more difficult data set, akin to the hierarchical multiscale strategy for full-waveform inversion. We perform TL by having subobjectives that escalate in complexity and by first training an NN at estimating horizontally layered velocity models and then proceeding to train an augmented network at estimating 2D dipping layered models. TL improves convergence and allows using a lesser quantity of 2D models for training. For synthetic tests, the structural similarity index measure of 2D interval velocity models in the time domain is 0.893±0.052 and the root-mean-square (rms) error is (198±91) m/s. We benchmark our algorithm on the Marmousi2 model and observe that our method can apply to velocity models with continuous deformed layers with dips up to 35°. We benchmark our algorithm on 2D marine field data and produce an rms velocity model that leads to coherent stacking and a time interval velocity model that reproduces salient features of the stacked section. TL expedites and regularizes training and data-driven techniques may be applied to field data with minimal preprocessing even though we lack real target velocity models.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.763

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207