MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402562568 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggae339

Event locations: speeding up grid searches using quadratic interpolation

2024· article· en· W4402562568 on OpenAlexaff
Hanh Bui, Mirko van der Baan

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGridInterpolation (computer graphics)Quadratic equationFunction (biology)Event (particle physics)AlgorithmMultivariate interpolationQuadratic functionComputer scienceMathematicsMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsGeometryPhysicsArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY The grid search method is a common approach to estimate the three spatial coordinates of event hypocentres. However, locating events in large search spaces with small grid spacings is computationally prohibitive. This study accelerates the grid searches over large search spaces using a quadratic interpolation technique. We start with the coarse-grid-estimated location, where we have the minimum value of the difference in the traveltimes between S and P waves summed over all receivers. Then, we select the neighbouring grid points and build a 3D quadratic function. The unknown coefficients of the 3D quadratic function are computed by solving a system of linear equations. After that, we interpolate the location by solving partial derivatives of the quadratic function. The quadratic interpolation technique performs well on both synthetic and real microseismic data examples, typically leading to similar event locations as those obtained using 10 times smaller grid spacings in all three directions, at a minor additional computational expense, and without the need to generate traveltimes at new spatial positions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207