Robust multidimensional reconstruction via group sparsity with Radon operators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Seismic data processing, specifically tasks like denoising and interpolation, often hinges on sparse solutions of linear systems. Group sparsity plays an essential role in this context by enhancing sparse inversion. It introduces more refined constraints, which preserve the inherent relationships within seismic data. To this end, we propose a robust orthogonal matching pursuit algorithm, combined with Radon operators in the frequency-slowness (f-p) domain, to tackle the strong group sparsity problem. This approach is vital for interpolating seismic data and attenuating erratic noise simultaneously. Our algorithm takes advantage of group sparsity by selecting the dominant slowness group in each iteration and fitting Radon coefficients with a robust ℓ1-ℓ1 norm using the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) solver. Its ability to resist erratic noise, along with its superior performance in applications such as simultaneous source deblending and reconstruction of noisy onshore data sets, underscores the importance of group sparsity. Synthetic and real comparative analyses further demonstrate that strong group sparsity inversion consistently outperforms corresponding traditional methods without the group sparsity constraint. These comparisons emphasize the necessity of integrating group sparsity in these applications, thereby indicating its indispensable role in optimizing seismic data processing.
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 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".