Seismic-Q Compensation by Iterative Time-Domain Deconvolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attenuation is often significant during seismic wave propagation in the subsurface, leading to the reduced resolution and narrower bandwidth of seismic images. Traditional corrections for such effects are inverse-Q filtering and deconvolution, which require a high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) to avoid noise boost-up. Here, we propose a time-domain method offering advantages in the resolution and interpretational quality of the resulting images. Similar to wavelet transforms, the iterative time-domain deconvolution (ITD) represents the seismogram by a superposition of non-stationary source wavelets modeled in the appropriate attenuation model. Arbitrary frequency-dependent Q and velocity dispersion laws can be used and non-Q type attenuation can be caused by focusing, defocusing, scattering, effects of fine layering, and fluctuations of the wavefield. Compared to inverse-Q filtering and some deconvolution methods, the method does not boost high-frequency noise and is less sensitive to the accuracy of the Q model. We illustrate and compare this method to inverse-Q filtering by using several synthetic and real data examples. The tests include noise-contaminated data, inaccurate Q models, and variable source wavelets. The examples show that the ITD is a practical and effective tool for Q-compensation with a broad scope of potential applications, albeit with some defects. An important benefit of ITD that other methods may not possess could be the ability to utilize geological information, such as locations and sparseness of major reflectors or the presence of interpreted Q contrasts, which might be able to further improve the performance of ITD.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".