MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6936832726 · doi:10.5880/gfz.4.2.2018.002

Supplementary material to "Sensitivity and stability analysis of coda quality factors at The Geysers geothermal field, California"

2019· dataset· en· W6936832726 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCodaGeothermal gradientSeismogramMicroseismContext (archaeology)AzimuthQuality (philosophy)Induced seismicity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This data set is supplementary to the BSSA research article of Blanke et al. (2019), in which the local S-wave coda quality factor at The Geysers geothermal field, California, is investigated. Over 700 induced microseismic events recorded between June 2009 and March 2015 at 31 short-period stations of the Berkeley-Geysers Seismic Network were used to estimate the frequency-dependent coda quality factor (Q_C) using the method of Phillips (1985). A sensitivity analysis was performed to different input parameters (magnitude range, lapse time, moving window width, total coda length and seismic sensor component) to gain a better overview on how these parameters influence Q_C estimates. Tested parameters mainly show a low impact on the outcome whereas applied quality criteria like signal-to-noise ratio and allowed uncertainties of Q_C estimates were found to be the most sensitive factors. Frequency-dependent mean-Q_C curves were calculated from seismograms of induced earthquakes for each station located at The Geysers using the tested favored input parameters. The final results were tested in the context of spatio-temporal behavior of Q_C in the reservoir considering distance-, azimuth and geothermal production rate variations. A distance and azimuthal dependence was found which is related to the reservoir anisotropy, lithological-, and structural features. By contrast, variations in geothermal production rates do not influence the estimates. In addition, the final results were compared with previous estimated frequency-independent intrinsic direct S-wave quality factors (Q_D) of Kwiatek et al. (2015). A match of Q_D was observed with Q_C estimates obtained at 7 Hz center-frequency, suggesting that Q_D might not be of an intrinsic but of scattering origin at The Geysers. Additionally, Q_C estimates feature lower spreading of values and thus a higher stability. The Geysers geothermal field is located approximately 110 km northwest of San Francisco, California in the Mayacamas Mountains. It is the largest steam-dominated geothermal reservoir operating since the 1960s. The local seismicity is clearly related to the water injections and steam production with magnitudes up to ~5 occurring down to 5 km depth, reaching the high temperature zone (up to 360°C). The whole study area is underlain by a felsite (granitic intrusion) that shows an elevation towards the southeast and subsides towards northwest. A fracture network induces anisotropy into the otherwise isotropic rocks featuring different orientations. Moreover, shear-wave splitting and high attenuating seismic signals are observed and motivate to analyze the frequency-dependent coda quality factor. Two data sets were analyzed: one distinct cluster located in the northwest (NW) close to injection wells Prati-9 and Prati-29, and the other one southeast (SE) of The Geysers, California, USA, close to station TCH (38° 50′ 08.2″ N, 122° 49′ 33.7″ W and 38° 46′ 59.5″ N, 122° 44′ 13.2″ W, respectively). The frequency-dependent coda quality factor is estimated from the seismic S-wave coda by applying the moving window method and regression analysis of Phillips (1985). Different input parameters including moving widow width, lapse time and total coda length are used to obtain Q_C estimates and associated uncertainties. Within a sensitivity analysis we investigated the influence of these parameters and also of magnitude ranges and seismic sensor components on Q_C estimates. The coda analysis was performed for each event at each sensor component of each station. The seismograms were filtered in predefined octave-width frequency bands with center-frequencies ranging from 1-69 Hz. The moving window method was applied starting in the early coda (after the S-onset) for each frequency band measuring the decay of Power Spectral Density spectra. The decay of coda amplitudes was fitted with a regression line and Q_C estimates were calculated from its decay slope for each frequency band. In a final step a mean-Q_C curve was calculated for each available station within the study area resulting in different curves dependent on event location sites in the northwest and southeast. Data Description The data contain final mean-Q_C estimates of the NW and SE Geysers, coda Q estimates at 7 Hz center-frequency calculated by using the NW cluster, and initial direct Q estimates of Kwiatek et al. (2015) using the same data of the NW cluster. Table S1 shows final mean coda quality factor estimates obtained from the NW cluster at injection wells Prati-9 and Prati-29. The column headers show stations (station), center-frequencies of octave-width frequency bands in Hertz (f[Hz]), mean coda Q estimates (meanQc) and related standard deviations (std), all obtained by coda analysis. Table S2 shows the final mean coda quality factor estimates obtained from additional selected 100 events in the SE Geysers. Column headers correspond to those in Table S1. Table S3 shows coda Q estimates related to 7 Hz center-frequency. The column headers show stations (station), center-frequency of octave-width frequency bands in Hertz (f[Hz]), coda Q estimates at 7 Hz center-frequency (Q_C) and related standard deviations (std2sigma; 95% confidence level), all obtained by coda analysis. Table S4 shows selected direct S-wave quality factors of Kwiatek et al. (2015) obtained by spectral fitting. The column headers show stations (station) and direct S-wave Q estimates (Q_D). The four tables are provided in tab separated txt format. Tables S3 and S4 are used for a comparative study and displayed in Figure 12 of the BSSA article mentioned above.

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)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5800.090

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→