USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70028767

The inverse problem of refraction travel times, part I: Types of Geophysical Nonuniqueness through Minimization

Abstract

In a set of two papers we study the inverse problem of refraction travel times. The purpose of this work is to use the study as a basis for development of more sophisticated methods for finding more reliable solutions to the inverse problem of refraction travel times, which is known to be nonunique. The first paper, "Types of Geophysical Nonuniqueness through Minimization," emphasizes the existence of different forms of nonuniqueness in the realm of inverse geophysical problems. Each type of nonuniqueness requires a different type and amount of a priori information to acquire a reliable solution. Based on such coupling, a nonuniqueness classification is designed. Therefore, since most inverse geophysical problems are nonunique, each inverse problem must be studied to define what type of nonuniqueness it belongs to and thus determine what type of a priori information is necessary to find a realistic solution. The second paper, "Quantifying Refraction Nonuniqueness Using a Three-layer Model," serves as an example of such an approach. However, its main purpose is to provide a better understanding of the inverse refraction problem by studying the type of nonuniqueness it possesses. An approach for obtaining a realistic solution to the inverse refraction problem is planned to be offered in a third paper that is in preparation. The main goal of this paper is to redefine the existing generalized notion of nonuniqueness and a priori information by offering a classified, discriminate structure. Nonuniqueness is often encountered when trying to solve inverse problems. However, possible nonuniqueness diversity is typically neglected and nonuniqueness is regarded as a whole, as an unpleasant "black box" and is approached in the same manner by applying smoothing constraints, damping constraints with respect to the solution increment and, rarely, damping constraints with respect to some sparse reference information about the true parameters. In practice, when solving geophysical problems different types of nonuniqueness exist, and thus there are different ways to solve the problems. Nonuniqueness is usually regarded as due to data error, assuming the true geology is acceptably approximated by simple mathematical models. Compounding the nonlinear problems, geophysical applications routinely exhibit exact-data nonuniqueness even for models with very few parameters adding to the nonuniqueness due to data error. While nonuniqueness variations have been defined earlier, they have not been linked to specific use of a priori information necessary to resolve each case. Four types of nonuniqueness, typical for minimization problems are defined with the corresponding methods for inclusion of a priori information to find a realistic solution without resorting to a non-discriminative approach. The above-developed stand-alone classification is expected to be helpful when solving any geophysical inverse problems. ?? Birkha??user Verlag, Basel, 2005.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J. Ivanov, R. D. Miller, J. Xia, D. Steeples, C.B. Park. 2005. The inverse problem of refraction travel times, part I: Types of Geophysical Nonuniqueness through Minimization. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-004-2615-1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Local variations in broadband sensor installations: Orientations, sensitivities, and noise levels

As seismologists continue to place more stringent demands on data quality, accurately described metadata are becoming increasingly important. In order to better constrain the orientation and sensitivities of seismometers deployed in U.S. Geological Survey networks, the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) has recently begun identifying true north with a fiber optic gyroscope (FOG) and has developed methodologies to constrain mid-band, vertical component sensitivity levels to less than 1% in a controlled environment. However, questions remain regarding the accuracy of this new alignment technique as well as if instrument sensitivities and background noise levels are stable when the seismometers are installed in different environmental settings. In this study, we examine the stability and repeatability of these parameters by reinstalling two high-quality broadband seismometers (Streckeisen STS-2.5 and Nanometrics T-360 Global Seismographic Network (GSN) version) at different locations around the ASL and comparing them to each other and a reference STS-6 seismometer that stayed stationary for the duration of the experiment. We find that even in different environmental conditions, the sensitivities of the two broadband seismometers stayed stable to within 0.1% and that orientations attained using the FOG are generally accurate to within a degree. However, one install was off by 5° due to a mistake made by the installation team. These results indicate that while technology and methodologies are now in place to calibrate and orient a seismometer to within 1°, human error both during the installation and while producing the metadata is often a limiting factor. Finally, we find that background noise levels at short periods (0.1–1 s) become noisier when the sensors are emplaced in unconsolidated materials, whereas the noise levels at long periods (30–100 s) are not sensitive to local geological structure on the vertical components.

Pure and Applied Geophysics

Inter-source interferometry of seismic body waves: Required conditions and examples

Seismic interferometry is widely applied to retrieve wavefields propagating between receivers. Another version of seismic interferometry, called inter-source interferometry, uses the principles of seismic reciprocity and expands interferometric applications to retrieve waves that propagate between two seismic sources. Previous studies of inter-source interferometry usually involve surface-wave and coda-wave estimations. We use inter-source interferometry to estimate the P-waves propagating between two sources rather than the estimation of surface waves and coda waves. We show that the recovered arrival times are dependent on the accuracy of the earthquake catalog of the two sources. Using inter-source interferometry, one can recover the waveform of the direct body waves and potentially reconstruct the waveform of coda waves, depending on the source-receiver geometry. The retrieval of these waveforms is accurate only when the wavefield is sampled with approximately 4 receivers per wavelength in the stationary phase zone. We show that using only receivers inside the stationary phase region for inter-source interferometry introduces the phase error of approximately 0.3 radians. In our study, we show an example of the P-wavefield reconstruction between two earthquakes using the seismic records from an array along San Andreas Fault. The retrieved P waves give a qualitative estimation of the thickness of the low-velocity zone of San Andreas Fault of approximately 4 km.

Pure and Applied Geophysics