MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400411299 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2024.3424659

A Test-Time Learning Approach to Reparameterize the Geophysical Inverse Problem With a Convolutional Neural Network

2024· article· en· W4400411299 on OpenAlexaff
A. Xu, Lindsey J. Heagy

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsSystems, Applications & Products in Data Processing (Canada)University of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkInverse problemComputer scienceArtificial neural networkGeophysicsTest (biology)Artificial intelligenceGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regularization is critical for solving ill-posed geophysical inverse problems. Explicit regularization is often used, but there are opportunities to explore the implicit regularization effects that are inherent in a neural network structure. Researchers have discovered that the convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture inherently enforces a regularization that is advantageous for addressing diverse inverse problems in computer vision (CV), including denoising and in-painting. In this study, we examine the applicability of this implicit regularization to geophysical inversions. The CNN maps an arbitrary vector to the model space. The predicted subsurface model is then fed into a forward numerical simulation to generate corresponding predicted measurements. Subsequently, the objective function value is computed by comparing these predicted measurements with the observed measurements. The backpropagation algorithm is employed to update the trainable parameters of the CNN during the inversion. Note that the CNN in our proposed method does not require training before the inversion; rather, the CNN weights are estimated in the inversion process; hence, this is a test-time learning (TTL) approach. In this study, we choose to focus on the direct current (dc) resistivity inverse problem, which is representative of typical Tikhonov-style geophysical inversions (e.g., gravity and electromagnetic), to test our hypothesis. The experimental results demonstrate that the implicit regularization can be useful in some dc resistivity inversions. We also provide a discussion of the potential sources of this implicit regularization introduced from the CNN architecture and discuss some practical guides for applying the proposed method to other geophysical methods.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207