MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381327949 · doi:10.1190/geo2022-0568.1

Understanding seismic velocity variations of subsea permafrost: A sensitivity study

2023· article· en· W4381327949 on OpenAlexafffund
Jefferson Bustamante Restrepo, Gabriel Fabien‐Ouellet, Mathieu J. Duchesne, Amr Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPermafrostGeologySubseaSeismologySeismic velocityGeotechnical engineeringOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Monitoring the change in permafrost conditions and distribution is crucial for forecasting global warming. As seismic velocities increase with ice content, marine seismic surveys can map the top of ice-bearing subsea permafrost on a large scale. However, conventional seismic methods cannot fully map internal velocity variations linked to changes in ice content because the removal of guided waves and multiples is challenging for reflection processing. Nevertheless, these arrivals carry information about velocity variations with depth. We investigate if a joint analysis of various wave arrivals could provide information about velocity variations within permafrost and accurately estimate the permafrost thickness. Through a sensitivity analysis, we estimate the feasibility of using different wave arrivals, such as reflections, refractions, multiples, and guided waves, to better characterize permafrost conditions. We find that guided waves are sensitive to velocity variations within permafrost and can detect the depth of the permafrost’s base under certain geologic conditions. Then, we combine the analysis of all seismic arrivals to derive a subsurface permafrost model for a seismic line collected in the Beaufort Sea. The joint analysis reveals the transitions in depth between ice-bonded and partially ice-bonded permafrost and offers a crude estimate of permafrost thickness.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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