The impact of approximations and arbitrary choices on geophysical images

Whenever a geophysical image is to be constructed, a variety of choices must be made. Some, such as those governing data selection and processing, or model parametrization, are somewhat arbitrary: there may be little reason to prefer one choice over another. Others, such as defining the theoretical framework within which the data are to be explained, may be more straightforward: typically, an ‘exact’ theory exists, but various approximations may need to be adopted in order to make the imaging problem computationally tractable. Differences between any two images of the same system can be explained in terms of differences between these choices. Understanding the impact of each particular decision is essential if images are to be interpreted properly—but little progress has been made towards a quantitative treatment of this effect. In this paper, we consider a general linearized inverse problem, applicable to a wide range of imaging situations. We write down an expression for the difference between two images produced using similar inversion strategies, but where different choices have been made. This provides a framework within which inversion algorithms may be analysed, and allows us to consider how image effects may arise. In this paper, we take a general view, and do not specialize our discussion to any specific imaging problem or setup (beyond the restrictions implied by the use of linearized inversion techniques). In particular, we look at the concept of ‘hybrid inversion’, in which highly accurate synthetic data (typically the result of an expensive numerical simulation) is combined with an inverse operator constructed based on theoretical approximations. It is generally supposed that this offers the benefits of using the more complete theory, without the full computational costs. We argue that the inverse operator is as important as the forward calculation in determining the accuracy of results. We illustrate this using a simple example, based on imaging the density structure of a vibrating string.

[1]  M. A. Meju,et al.  Iterative most-squares inversion: application to magnetotelluric data , 1992 .

[2]  Malcolm Sambridge,et al.  Parallel tempering for strongly nonlinear geoacoustic inversion. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Paul Käufl,et al.  A framework for fast probabilistic centroid-moment-tensor determination—inversion of regional static displacement measurements , 2014 .

[4]  M. Sambridge,et al.  Seismic tomography with the reversible jump algorithm , 2009 .

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

[6]  A. Fichtner,et al.  Resolution tests revisited: The power of random numbers , 2013 .

[7]  G. Stewart On the Perturbation of Pseudo-Inverses, Projections and Linear Least Squares Problems , 1977 .

[8]  A.,et al.  Inverse Problems = Quest for Information , 2022 .

[9]  Ludovic Métivier,et al.  A guided tour of multiparameter full-waveform inversion with multicomponent data: From theory to practice , 2013 .

[10]  Paul Käufl,et al.  Bayesian inversion of free oscillations for Earth’s radial (an)elastic structure , 2014 .

[11]  G. Laske,et al.  Theory and Observations – Normal Modes and Surface Wave Measurements , 2007 .

[12]  S. Lebedev,et al.  Global shear speed structure of the upper mantle and transition zone , 2013 .

[13]  John H. Woodhouse,et al.  Determination of earthquake source parameters from waveform data for studies of global and regional seismicity , 1981 .

[14]  D. Komatitsch,et al.  The Spectral-Element Method, Beowulf Computing, and Global Seismology , 2002, Science.

[15]  Luis Rivera,et al.  On the use of the checker-board test to assess the resolution of tomographic inversions , 1993 .

[16]  F. A. Dahlen,et al.  The Effect of A General Aspherical Perturbation on the Free Oscillations of the Earth , 1978 .

[17]  Jeannot Trampert,et al.  Toward quantifying uncertainty in travel time tomography using the null-space shuttle , 2012 .

[18]  A. Sluis,et al.  Stability of the solutions of linear least squares problems , 1974 .

[19]  Andrew P. Valentine,et al.  Assessing the uncertainties on seismic source parameters: Towards realistic error estimates for centroid-moment-tensor determinations , 2012 .

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

[21]  S. Lebedev,et al.  Global Heterogeneity of the Lithosphere and Underlying Mantle: A Seismological Appraisal Based on Multimode Surface-Wave Dispersion Analysis, Shear-Velocity Tomography, and Tectonic Regionalization , 2015 .

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

[23]  M. Sambridge Geophysical inversion with a neighbourhood algorithm—I. Searching a parameter space , 1999 .

[24]  Barbara Romanowicz,et al.  Inferring upper-mantle structure by full waveform tomography with the spectral element method , 2011 .

[25]  Jean Virieux,et al.  An overview of full-waveform inversion in exploration geophysics , 2009 .

[26]  A. Valentine,et al.  Reducing errors in seismic tomography: combined inversion for sources and structure , 2010 .

[27]  Barbara Romanowicz,et al.  Waveform Tomography Reveals Channeled Flow at the Base of the Oceanic Asthenosphere , 2013, Science.

[28]  E. Bozdağ,et al.  On crustal corrections in surface wave tomography , 2008 .

[29]  Gene H. Golub,et al.  Matrix computations , 1983 .

[30]  Joseph F. Grcar,et al.  Spectral Condition Numbers of Orthogonal Projections and Full Rank Linear Least Squares Residuals , 2010, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl..

[31]  Andreas Fichtner,et al.  Resolution analysis in full waveform inversion , 2011 .

[32]  V. Cormier Theory and Observations – Forward Modeling/Synthetic Body Wave Seismograms , 2007 .

[33]  Joseph S. Resovsky,et al.  Constraining odd‐degree earth structure with coupled free‐oscillations , 1995 .

[34]  Hicks,et al.  Gauss–Newton and full Newton methods in frequency–space seismic waveform inversion , 1998 .

[35]  Andreas Fichtner,et al.  Hessian kernels of seismic data functionals based upon adjoint techniques , 2011 .