A computationally feasible approximate resolution matrix for seismic inverse problems

SUMMARY Seismic inversion produces model estimates which arc at most unique in an average sense. The model resolution matrix quantifies the spatial extent over which the estimate averages the true model. Although the resolution matrix has traditionally been defined in terms of the singular value decomposition of the discretized forward problem, this computation is prohibitive for inverse problems of realistic size. Inversion requires one to solve a large normal matrix system which is best tackled by an iterative technique such as the conjugate gradient method. The close connection between the conjugate gradient and Lanczos algorithms allows us to construct an extremely inexpensive approximation to the model resolution matrix. Synthetic experiments indicate the data dependence of this particular approximation. The approximation is very good in the vicinity of large events in the data. Two large linear viscoelastic inversion experiments on p-τ marine data from the Gulf of Mexico provide estimates of the elastic parameter reflectivities corresponding to two different seismic sources. Traditionally, one evaluates the accuracy of the two reflectivity estimates by comparing them with measured well logs. The approximate model resolution matrices agree with the well-log ranking of the two models and provide us with a way to compare different model estimates when, for example, such well-log measurements are not available.

[1]  C. Lanczos An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral operators , 1950 .

[2]  M. Hestenes,et al.  Methods of conjugate gradients for solving linear systems , 1952 .

[3]  Milton Abramowitz,et al.  Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables , 1964 .

[4]  G. Backus,et al.  The Resolving Power of Gross Earth Data , 1968 .

[5]  Joel Franklin,et al.  Well-posed stochastic extensions of ill-posed linear problems☆ , 1970 .

[6]  R. Wiggins,et al.  The general linear inverse problem - Implication of surface waves and free oscillations for earth structure. , 1972 .

[7]  Guust Nolet,et al.  Resolution Analysis for Discrete Systems , 1978 .

[8]  D. Jackson The use of a priori data to resolve non‐uniqueness in linear inversion , 1979 .

[9]  Paul G. Richards,et al.  Quantitative Seismology: Theory and Methods , 1980 .

[10]  B. Parlett The Symmetric Eigenvalue Problem , 1981 .

[11]  Magnus R. Hestenes,et al.  Conjugate Direction Methods in Optimization , 1980 .

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

[13]  Sven Treitel,et al.  Plane‐wave decomposition of seismograms , 1982 .

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

[15]  R. T. Cutler,et al.  Tomographic determination of velocity and depth in laterally varying media , 1985 .

[16]  Gregory Beylkin,et al.  Imaging of discontinuities in the inverse scattering problem by inversion of a causal generalized Radon transform , 1985 .

[17]  A slant-stack procedure for point-source data , 1986 .

[18]  J. Scales On the use of conjugate gradient to calculate the eigenvalues and singular values of large, sparse matrices , 1989 .

[19]  Gene H. Golub,et al.  Some History of the Conjugate Gradient and Lanczos Algorithms: 1948-1976 , 1989, SIAM Rev..

[20]  F. Collino,et al.  A numerical method for the explanation of sensitivity: the case of the identification of the 2D stratified elastic medium , 1990 .

[21]  R. Snieder,et al.  Solving large linear inverse problems by projection , 1990 .

[22]  George A. McMechan,et al.  tau-p Seismic Data for Viscoelastic Media - Part 2: Linearized INVERSION1 , 1991 .

[23]  Michel Kern,et al.  Inversion of Reflection Seismograams by Differential Semblance Analysis: Algorithm Structure and Synthetic Examples , 1992 .

[24]  Don W. Vasco,et al.  Formal inversion of ISC arrival times for mantle P-velocity structure , 1993 .

[25]  J. Berryman Resolution of iterative inverses in seismic tomography , 1994 .

[26]  P. Stark,et al.  Confidence regions for mantle heterogeneity , 1994 .

[27]  Michel Kern,et al.  Inversion of reflection seismograms by differential semblance analysis: algorithm structure and synthetic examples1 , 1994 .

[28]  James G. Berryman,et al.  Tomographic resolution without singular value decomposition , 1994, Optics & Photonics.

[29]  Ed Anderson,et al.  LAPACK Users' Guide , 1995 .

[30]  Estimating the energy source and reflectivity by seismic inversion , 1995 .

[31]  R G Pratt,et al.  Are our parameter estimators biased? The significance of finite-difference regularization operators , 1995 .

[32]  G. McMechan,et al.  Estimation of resolution and covariance for large matrix inversions , 1995 .

[33]  K. Bube,et al.  Resolution of Crosswell Tomography With Transmission And Reflection Traveltimes , 1995 .

[34]  M. Hanke Conjugate gradient type methods for ill-posed problems , 1995 .

[35]  William W. Symes,et al.  Full waveform inversion of marine reflection data in the plane-wave domain , 1997 .