Abstract
SUMMARY Seismic full waveform inversion (FWI) is a powerful method for estimating quantitative subsurface physical parameters from seismic data. As the FWI is a nonlinear problem, the linearized approach updates model iteratively from an initial model, which can get trapped in local minima. In the presence of a high-velocity contrast, such as at Moho, the reflection coefficient and recorded waveforms from wide-aperture seismic acquisition are extremely nonlinear around critical angles. The problem at the Moho is further complicated by the interference of lower crustal (Pg) and upper mantle (Pn) turning ray arrivals with the critically reflected Moho arrivals (PmP). In order to determine velocity structure near Moho, a nonlinear method should be used. We propose to solve this strong nonlinear FWI problem at Moho using a trans-dimensional Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method, where the earth model between lower crust and upper mantle is ideally parametrized with a 1-D assumption using a variable number of velocity interfaces. Different from common MCMC methods that require determining the number of unknown as a fixed prior before inversion, trans-dimensional MCMC allows the flexibility for an automatic estimation of both the model complexity (e.g. the number of velocity interfaces) and the velocity–depth structure from the data. We first test the algorithm on synthetic data using four representative Moho models and then apply to an ocean bottom seismometer (OBS) data from the Mid-Atlantic Ocean. A 2-D finite-difference solution of an acoustic wave equation is used for data simulation at each iteration of MCMC search, for taking into account the lateral heterogeneities in the upper crust, which is constrained from traveltime tomography and is kept unchanged during inversion; the 1-D model parametrization near Moho enables an efficient search of the trans-dimensional model space. Inversion results indicate that, with very little prior and the wide-aperture seismograms, the trans-dimensional FWI method is able to infer the posterior distribution of both the number of velocity interfaces and the velocity–depth model for a strong nonlinear problem, making the inversion a complete data-driven process. The distribution of interface matches the velocity discontinuities. We find that the Moho in the study area is a transition zone of 0.7 km, or a sharp boundary with velocities from around 7 km s−1 in the lower crust to 8 km s−1 of the upper mantle; both provide nearly identical waveform match for the field data. The ambiguity comes from the resolution limit of the band-limited seismic data and limited offset range for PmP arrivals.
Highlights
Seismic full waveform inversion (FWI) is a state-of-the-art method for estimating high-resolution quantitative subsurface images by fully exploiting the recorded waveform (Tarantola 1984; Pratt et al 1998; Shipp & Singh 2002; Fichtner et al 2006; Virieux & Operto 2009; Ray et al 2017)
The posterior distribution reflects how the prior knowledge about the model parameters is updated by the observed data, which, in the context of FWI, is the recorded waveform information. p(d) is a normalizing constant known as evidence, that makes the integral of the posterior distribution equal to unity
FWI of the PmP phase is rarely used for Moho model building, because of the strong nonlinearity observed in the vicinity of the critical offsets, the waveform interference from Pg and Pn phases, and the relatively low SNR for PmP phase compared with seismic reflections from the upper crust (Grad et al 2009; Hrubcovaet al. 2013; Jian et al 2017; Beller et al 2018)
Summary
Seismic full waveform inversion (FWI) is a state-of-the-art method for estimating high-resolution quantitative subsurface images by fully exploiting the recorded waveform (Tarantola 1984; Pratt et al 1998; Shipp & Singh 2002; Fichtner et al 2006; Virieux & Operto 2009; Ray et al 2017). It is based on minimizing the difference between observed and synthetic data, with a numerical solution of the complete wave equation for realistic simulation of seismic wave propagation. Previous studies suggest that the final outcome from FWI under linear assumption highly depends on the starting model, and the iterative process can get trapped in a local minima (Bozdaget al. 2011; Metivier et al 2016)
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.