Combination of Fourier and CRS-Based Reconstruction Algorithms in Land Seismic Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT. The reconstruction based on the partial CRS stacking operator presents higher signal-to-noise ratio and better continuity of events. However, irregularly sampled land data often introduce errors in the CRS attributes, creating artifacts that contaminate the seismic data. Recently, the combination of Fourier and CRS-based reconstruction algorithms has significantly solved these problems. The approach consists of applying a Fourier-based interpolation method as a regularization operator to the original data and then the CRS attributes are searched in the reconstructed data. The CRS attributes determined in this way are more accurate and they can be applied in two different forms, either in the interpolation and regularization of the original data or in the denoising of the Fourier-based reconstructed data. We propose to compare the combination of the Fourier-based interpolation methods MWNI and MPFI with the CRSbased interpolation method in order to evaluate which is the best preconditioner of the prestack data to search the CRS attributes. We applied the proposed flowcharts combining the interpolation methods mentioned above to the land seismic data from the Tacutu basin, which is vintage data with very low fold and noisy. The reconstructed data obtained by the combinations show significant improvements compared to the data reconstructed using the algorithms separately, in other words, the weaknesses and limitations of each method are overcome when they are applied in combination. The MWNI+CRS combination flow produces the best results, with the stacked section of reconstructed data showing better noise removal, enhancement of coherent events, better definition and continuity of steeply dipping events.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it