1887

Abstract

Summary

In this paper we make a comparison between wave-equation based inversions based on the adjoint-state and penalty methods. While the adjoint-state method involves the minimization of a data-misfit and exact solutions of the wave-equation for the current velocity model, the penalty-method aims to first find a wavefield that jointly fits the data and honours the physics, in a least-squares sense. Given this reconstructed wavefield, which is a proxy for the true wavefield in the true model, we calculate updates for the velocity model. Aside from being less nonlinear--the acoustic wave equation is linear in the wavefield and model parameters but not in both--the inversion is carried out over a solution space that includes both the model and the wavefield. This larger search space allows the algorithm to circumnavigate local minima, very much in the same way as recently proposed model extensions try to accomplish. We include examples for low frequencies, where we compare full-waveform inversion results for both methods, for good and bad starting models, and for high frequencies where we compare reverse-time migration with linearized imaging based on wavefield-reconstruction inversion. The examples confirm the expected benefits of the proposed method.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20140704
2014-06-16
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aravkin, A.Y. and van Leeuwen, T.
    [2012] Estimating nuisance parameters in inverse problems. Inverse Problems, 28(11), 115016, ISSN 0266-5611.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Haber, E., Ascher, U.M. and Oldenburg, D.
    [2000] On optimization techniques for solving nonlinear inverse problems. Inverse Problems, 16(5), 1263–1280, ISSN 0266-5611, doi:10.1088/0266‑5611/16/5/309.
    https://doi.org/10.1088/0266-5611/16/5/309 [Google Scholar]
  3. Plessix, R.E.
    [2006] A review of the adjoint-state method for computing the gradient of a functional with geophysical applications. Geophysical Journal International, 167(2), 495–503, ISSN 1365-246X, doi:10.1111/j.1365‑246X.2006.02978.x.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.02978.x [Google Scholar]
  4. Shah, N. et al.
    [2012] Quality assured full-waveform inversion: Ensuring starting model adequacy, chap. 499. 1–5, doi:10.1190/segam2012‑1228.1.
    https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2012-1228.1 [Google Scholar]
  5. van Leeuwen, T. and Herrmann, F.J.
    [2013a] Mitigating local minima in full-waveform inversion by expanding the search space. Geophysical Journal International, 195, 661–667, doi:10.1093/gji/ggt258.
    https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt258 [Google Scholar]
  6. [2013b] A penalty method for pde-constrained optimization.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20140704
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20140704
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error