Geophysical inversion for 3D contact surface geometry

被引:0
|
作者
Galley, Christopher G. [1 ]
Lelievre, Peter G. [2 ]
Farquharson, Colin G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Univ Newfoundland, Dept Earth Sci, St John, NF A1B 3X7, Canada
[2] Mt Allison Univ, Dept Math & Comp Sci, Sackville, NB E4L 1E4, Canada
关键词
TRIANGLE INTERSECTION TEST; SEISMIC TRAVEL-TIME; JOINT INVERSION; GRAVITY-DATA; FINITE-ELEMENT; MAGNETOTELLURIC DATA; CONSTRAINED INVERSION; HYBRID OPTIMIZATION; MAGNETIC DATA; MODEL;
D O I
10.1190/GEO2019-0614.1
中图分类号
P3 [地球物理学]; P59 [地球化学];
学科分类号
0708 ; 070902 ;
摘要
Geologists' interpretations about the earth typically involve distinct rock units with contacts between them. Three-dimensional geologic models typically comprise surfaces of tessellated polygons that represent the contacts. In contrast, geophysical inversions typically are performed on voxel meshes comprising space-filling elements. Standard minimum-structure voxel inversions recover smooth models, inconsistent with typical geologic interpretations. Various voxel inversion methods have been developed that attempt to produce models more consistent with such interpretations. However, many of those methods involve increased numerical challenges and ultimately the underlying parameterization of the earth is still inconsistent with geologists' interpretations. Surface geometry inversion (SGI) is a fundamentally different approach that effectively takes some initial surface-based model and alters the position of the contact surfaces to better fit the geophysical data. Many authors have developed SGI methods. In contrast to those, we are the first to develop a method with the following characteristics: we work directly with 3D explicit surfaces from an input geologic model of arbitrary complexity; we incorporate intersection detection methods to avoid unacceptable topological scenarios; we use global optimization strategies and stochastic sampling to solve the inverse problem and aid model assessment; and we use surface subdivision to reduce the number of model parameters, which also provides regularization without adding the complication of trade-off parameters in the objective function. We test our methods on simpler synthetic examples taken from early influential literature, and we demonstrate their typical use on a more complicated example based on a seafloor massive sulfide deposit. Our work provides a geophysical inversion approach that can work directly with 3D surface-based geologic models. With this approach, geophysical and geologic models can share the same parameterization; there is only a single model, with no need to translate information between two inconsistent parameterizations.
引用
收藏
页码:K27 / K45
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] 3D surface MRS method based on variable geometry inversion
    Zhao, Yue
    Lin, Jun
    Jiang, Chuandong
    ADVANCES IN ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH, 2017, : 345 - 349
  • [2] Integration of geophysical constraints for multilayer geometry refinements in 2.5D gravity inversion
    Xing, Jian
    Hao, Tianyao
    Xu, Ya
    Li, Zhiwei
    GEOPHYSICS, 2016, 81 (05) : G95 - G106
  • [3] 3D Monte Carlo geometry inversion using gravity data
    Wei, Xiaolong
    Sun, Jiajia
    Sen, Mrinal
    GEOPHYSICS, 2024, 89 (03) : G29 - G44
  • [4] 3D geophysical inversion modeling of gravity data to test the 3D geologic model of the Bradys geothermal area, Nevada, USA
    Jeffrey B. Witter
    Drew L. Siler
    James E. Faulds
    Nicholas H. Hinz
    Geothermal Energy, 4
  • [5] 3D geophysical inversion modeling of gravity data to test the 3D geologic model of the Bradys geothermal area, Nevada, USA
    Witter, Jeffrey B.
    Siler, Drew L.
    Faulds, James E.
    Hinz, Nicholas H.
    GEOTHERMAL ENERGY, 2016, 4 (01):
  • [6] Variational Bayesian inversion of synthetic 3D controlled-source electromagnetic geophysical data
    Penz, Sebastien
    Duchene, Bernard
    Mohammad-Djafari, Ali
    GEOPHYSICS, 2018, 83 (01) : E25 - E36
  • [7] 3D Joint Inversion of Borehole, Surface, and Airborne Magnetic Anomaly
    Shi, Ke
    Liu, Shuang
    Jian, Xiange
    Xu, Feng
    Mao, Youping
    Liu, Xianxin
    PURE AND APPLIED GEOPHYSICS, 2025, : 1489 - 1511
  • [8] Uncertainty and Resolution Analysis of 2D and 3D Inversion Models Computed from Geophysical Electromagnetic Data
    Ren, Zhengyong
    Kalscheuer, Thomas
    SURVEYS IN GEOPHYSICS, 2020, 41 (01) : 47 - 112
  • [9] Surface geometry inversion of transient electromagnetic data
    Lu, Xushan
    Farquharson, Colin G.
    Lelievre, Peter
    GEOPHYSICS, 2024, 89 (04) : E177 - E192
  • [10] 3D borehole-to-surface and surface electromagnetic modeling and inversion in the presence of steel infrastructure
    Um E.S.
    Kim J.
    Wilt M.
    Um, Evan Schankee (evanum@gmail.com), 1600, Society of Exploration Geophysicists (85): : E139 - E152