scholarly journals 3-D cross-gradient joint inversion of seismic refraction and DC resistivity data

2017 ◽  
Vol 141 ◽  
pp. 54-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhanjie Shi ◽  
Richard W. Hobbs ◽  
Max Moorkamp ◽  
Gang Tian ◽  
Lu Jiang
Geophysics ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 54 (9) ◽  
pp. 1212-1212
Author(s):  
D. J. Dodds

There appears to be an error in the formulation of the dc resistivity response in this paper. Equation (6) is valid only when the conductivity is constant, but the text and the notation imply that it is variable. Grant and West (1965) give the correct relation [their equation (14‐2)], which is restated here using Sasaki’s notation and accounting for source currents.


Geophysics ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 1931-1945 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaoguo Li ◽  
Douglas W. Oldenburg

We present an algorithm for inverting induced polarization (IP) data acquired in a 3-D environment. The algorithm is based upon the linearized equation for the IP response, and the inverse problem is solved by minimizing an objective function of the chargeability model subject to data and bound constraints. The minimization is carried out using an interior‐point method in which the bounds are incorporated by using a logarithmic barrier and the solution of the linear equations is accelerated using wavelet transforms. Inversion of IP data requires knowledge of the background conductivity. We study the effect of different approximations to the background conductivity by comparing IP inversions performed using different conductivity models, including a uniform half‐space and conductivities recovered from one‐pass 3-D inversions, composite 2-D inversions, limited AIM updates, and full 3-D nonlinear inversions of the dc resistivity data. We demonstrate that, when the background conductivity is simple, reasonable IP results are obtainable without using the best conductivity estimate derived from full 3-D inversion of the dc resistivity data. As a final area of investigation, we study the joint use of surface and borehole data to improve the resolution of the recovered chargeability models. We demonstrate that the joint inversion of surface and crosshole data produces chargeability models superior to those obtained from inversions of individual data sets.


Geophysics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 80 (1) ◽  
pp. EN43-EN55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niklas Juhojuntti ◽  
Jochen Kamm

We developed a method for joint inversion of seismic refraction and resistivity data, using sharp-boundary models with few layers (typically three). We demonstrated the usefulness of the approach via examples from near-surface case studies involving shallow groundwater exploration and geotechnical investigations, although it should also be applicable to other types of layered environments, e.g., sedimentary basins. In our model parameterization, the layer boundaries were common for the resistivity and velocity distributions. Within the layers, only lateral variations in the material parameters (resistivity and velocity) were allowed, and we assumed no correlation between these. The inversion was performed using a nonlinear least-squares algorithm, using lateral smoothing to the layer boundaries and to the materialparameters. Depending on the subsurface conditions, the smoothing can be applied either to the depth of the layer boundaries or to the layer thicknesses. The forward responses and Jacobian for refraction seismics were calculated through ray tracing. The resistivity computations were performed with finite differences and a cell-to-layer transform for the Fréchet derivatives. Our method performed well in synthetic tests, and in the case studies, the layer boundaries were in good agreement with in situ tests and seismic reflection data, although minimum-structure inversion generally has a better data fit due to more freedom to introduce model heterogeneity. We further found that our joint inversion approach can provide more accurate thickness estimates for seismic hidden layers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document