Skip to main content

Seismic waveform inversion best practices: regional, global and exploration test cases

Author(s): Modrak, Ryan; Tromp, Jeroen

Download
To refer to this page use: http://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/pr1xd0qx3k
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorModrak, Ryan-
dc.contributor.authorTromp, Jeroen-
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-25T14:59:34Z-
dc.date.available2022-01-25T14:59:34Z-
dc.date.issued2016-06-17en_US
dc.identifier.citationModrak, Ryan, and Jeroen Tromp. "Seismic waveform inversion best practices: regional, global and exploration test cases." Geophysical Journal International 206, no. 3 (2016): 1864-1889. doi:10.1093/gji/ggw202.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0956-540X-
dc.identifier.urihttp://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/pr1xd0qx3k-
dc.description.abstractReaching the global minimum of a waveform misfit function requires careful choices about the nonlinear optimization, preconditioning and regularization methods underlying an inversion. Because waveform inversion problems are susceptible to erratic convergence associated with strong nonlinearity, one or two test cases are not enough to reliably inform such decisions. We identify best practices, instead, using four seismic near-surface problems, one regional problem and two global problems. To make meaningful quantitative comparisons between methods, we carry out hundreds of inversions, varying one aspect of the implementation at a time. Comparing nonlinear optimization algorithms, we find that limited-memory BFGS provides computational savings over nonlinear conjugate gradient methods in a wide range of test cases. Comparing preconditioners, we show that a new diagonal scaling derived from the adjoint of the forward operator provides better performance than two conventional preconditioning schemes. Comparing regularization strategies, we find that projection, convolution, Tikhonov regularization and total variation regularization are effective in different contexts. Besides questions of one strategy or another, reliability and efficiency in waveform inversion depend on close numerical attention and care. Implementation details involving the line search and restart conditions have a strong effect on computational cost, regardless of the chosen nonlinear optimization algorithm.en_US
dc.format.extent1864 - 1889en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.relation.ispartofGeophysical Journal Internationalen_US
dc.rightsFinal published version. Article is made available in OAR by the publisher's permission or policy.en_US
dc.titleSeismic waveform inversion best practices: regional, global and exploration test casesen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doidoi:10.1093/gji/ggw202-
dc.identifier.eissn1365-246X-
pu.type.symplectichttp://www.symplectic.co.uk/publications/atom-terms/1.0/journal-articleen_US

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Seismic_waveform_inversion_practices_Regional_global_exploration_test_cases.pdf15.42 MBAdobe PDFView/Download


Items in OAR@Princeton are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.