Multiscale seismic tomography

Summary Seismic traveltime tomography is commonly discretized by a truncated expansion of the pursued model in terms of chosen basis functions. Whether parametrization affects the actual resolving power of a given data set as well as the robustness of the resulting earth model has long been seriously debated. From the perspective of the model resolution, however, there is one important aspect of the parametrization issue of seismic tomography that has yet to be systematically explored, that is, the space–frequency localization of a chosen parametrization. In fact, the two most common parametrizations tend to enforce resolution in each of their own particular domains. Namely, parametrization in terms of spherical harmonics with global support tends to emphasize spectral resolution while sacrificing the spatial resolution, whereas the compactly supported pixels tend to behave in the opposite manner. Some of the significant discrepancies among tomographic models are very likely to be manifestations of this effect, when dealing with data sets with non-uniform sampling. With an example of the tomographic inversion for the lateral shear wave heterogeneity of the D″ layer using S–SKS traveltimes, we demonstrate an alternative parametrization in terms of the multiresolution representation of the pursued model function. Unlike previous attempts of multiscale inversion that invoke pixels with variable sizes, or overlay several layers of tessellation with different grid intervals, our formulation invokes biorthogonal generalized Harr wavelets on a sphere. We show that multiresolution representation can be constructed very easily from an existing block-based discretization. A natural scale hierarchy of the pursued model structure constrained by the resolving power of the given sampling is embedded within the solution obtained. It provides a natural regularization scheme based on the actual ray-path sampling and is thus free from a priori prejudices intrinsic to most regularization schemes. Unlike solutions obtained through spherical harmonics or spherical blocks that tend to collapse structures onto ray paths, our parametrization imposes regionally varying Nyquist limits, that is, robustly resolvable local wavelength bands within the obtained solution.

[1]  Harmen Bijwaard,et al.  Closing the gap between regional and global travel time tomography , 1998 .

[2]  A. Dziewoński,et al.  Comment on “Reproducing Earth's kernel: Uncertainty of the shape of the core‐mantle boundary from PKP and PcP travel times” by P. B. Stark and N. W. Hengartner , 1995 .

[3]  J. Scales,et al.  Resolution of seismic waveform inversion: Bayes versus Occam , 1996 .

[4]  Roel Snieder,et al.  Model Estimations Biased by Truncated Expansions: Possible Artifacts in Seismic Tomography , 1996, Science.

[5]  Barbara Romanowicz,et al.  Imaging 3‐D spherical convection models: What can seismic tomography tell us about mantle dynamics? , 1997 .

[6]  Roel Snieder,et al.  Obtaining smooth solutions to large, linear, inverse problems , 1994 .

[7]  R. Parker Geophysical Inverse Theory , 1994 .

[8]  G. Pavlis,et al.  Convolutional quelling in seismic tomography , 1989 .

[9]  W. Sweldens The Lifting Scheme: A Custom - Design Construction of Biorthogonal Wavelets "Industrial Mathematics , 1996 .

[10]  B. Kuo,et al.  Global shear velocity heterogeneities in the D″ layer: Inversion from Sd‐SKS differential travel times , 1997 .

[11]  G. Laske,et al.  A shear - velocity model of the mantle , 1996, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[12]  B. Steinberger,et al.  Advection of plumes in mantle flow: implications for hotspot motion, mantle viscosity and plume distribution , 1998 .

[13]  Walter H. F. Smith,et al.  Free software helps map and display data , 1991 .

[14]  P. Stark,et al.  Bumps on the core‐mantle boundary: Are they facts or artifacts? , 1993 .

[15]  Andrea Morelli,et al.  Topography of the core–mantle boundary and lateral homogeneity of the liquid core , 1987, Nature.

[16]  Stéphane Mallat,et al.  A Theory for Multiresolution Signal Decomposition: The Wavelet Representation , 1989, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[17]  G. Masters,et al.  Lower-mantle structure from ScS–S differential travel times , 1991, Nature.

[18]  Hua-wei Zhou,et al.  A high-resolution P wave model for the top 1200 km of the mantle , 1996 .

[19]  Guust Nolet,et al.  Fréchet kernels for finite‐frequency traveltimes—II. Examples , 2000 .

[20]  G Backus Inference from Inadequate and Inaccurate Data, II. , 1970, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  W. Menke Geophysical data analysis : discrete inverse theory , 1984 .

[22]  P. Stark,et al.  Reproducing Earth's kernel: Uncertainty of the shape of the core‐mantle boundary from PKP and PcP travel times , 1993 .

[23]  Lapo Boschi,et al.  High‐ and low‐resolution images of the Earth's mantle: Implications of different approaches to tomographic modeling , 1999 .

[24]  Adam M. Dziewonski,et al.  Mapping the lower mantle: Determination of lateral heterogeneity in P velocity up to degree and order 6 , 1984 .

[25]  Thorne Lay,et al.  Tomographic inversion of S-SKS times for shear velocity heterogeneity in D″: Degree 12 and hybrid models , 2000 .

[26]  Guust Nolet,et al.  Three-dimensional sensitivity kernels for finite-frequency traveltimes: the banana–doughnut paradox , 1999 .

[27]  A. Dziewoński,et al.  The harmonic expansion approach to the retrieval of deep Earth structure , 1987 .

[28]  T. Tanimoto Long-wavelength S-wave velocity structure throughout the mantle , 1990 .

[29]  Masayuki Obayashi,et al.  Subducting slabs stagnant in the mantle transition zone , 1992 .

[30]  Wei-jia Su,et al.  Degree 12 model of shear velocity heterogeneity in the mantle , 1994 .

[31]  Peter Schröder,et al.  Spherical wavelets: efficiently representing functions on the sphere , 1995, SIGGRAPH.

[32]  Albert Tarantola,et al.  Three‐dimensional inversion without blocks , 1984 .

[33]  Wim Sweldens,et al.  The lifting scheme: a construction of second generation wavelets , 1998 .

[34]  G. Backus,et al.  Inference from Inadequate and Inaccurate Data, III. , 1970, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  John R. Booker,et al.  A Backus—Gilbert approach to inversion of travel-time data for three-dimensional velocity structure , 1979 .

[36]  Jeroen Tromp,et al.  Global and regional surface‐wave inversions: A spherical‐spline parameterization , 1998 .

[37]  A. Dziewoński,et al.  Global Images of the Earth's Interior , 1987, Science.

[38]  R. Parker Understanding Inverse Theory , 1977 .

[39]  R. Hilst,et al.  High resolution global tomography : a snapshot of convection in the Earth , 1997 .

[40]  F. Delprat-Jannaud,et al.  Ill‐posed and well‐posed formulations of the reflection travel time tomography problem , 1993 .

[41]  Michael A. Saunders,et al.  LSQR: An Algorithm for Sparse Linear Equations and Sparse Least Squares , 1982, TOMS.

[42]  F. Sansò On the aliasing problem in the spherical harmonic analysis , 1990 .

[43]  David A. Yuen,et al.  Viewing seismic velocity anomalies with 3‐D continuous Gaussian wavelets , 1999 .