No abstract

No abstract

This paper uses a Bayesian approach for inverting seismic amplitude versus offset (AVO) data to provide estimates and uncertainties of the viscoelastic physical parameters at an interface. The inversion is based on Gibbs' sampling approach to determine properties of the posterior probability distribution (PPD), such as the posterior mean, maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimate, marginal probability distributions, and covariances. The Bayesian formulation represents a fully nonlinear inversion; the results are compared to those of standard linearized inversion. The nonlinear and linearized approaches are applied to synthetic test cases which consider AVO inversion for shallow marine environments with both unconsolidated and consolidated seabeds. The result of neglecting attenuation in the seabed is investigated, and the effects of data factors such as independent and systematic errors and the range of incident angles are considered. The Bayesian approach is also applied to estimate the physical parameters and uncertainties from AVO data collected at two sites along a seismic line in the Baltic Sea with differing sediment types; it clearly identifies the distinct seabed compositions. Data uncertainties (independent and systematic) required for this analysis are estimated using a maximum‐likelihood approach.

In a study at a military range with the objective to discriminate potentially hazardous 4.2-inch mortars from nonhazardous shrapnel, range, and cultural debris, six different discrimination techniques were tested using data from an array of magnetometers, a time-domain electromagnetic induction ͑EMI͒ cart, an array of time-domain sensors, and a time-domain EMI cart with a wider measurement bandwidth. Discrimination was achieved using rule-based or statistical classification of feature vectors extracted from dipole or polarization tensor models fit to detected anomalies. For magnetics, the ranking by moment yielded better discrimination results than that of apparent remanence from relatively large remanent magnetizations of several of the seeded items. The magnetometer results produced very accurate depths and fewer failed fits attributable to noisy data or model insuffi-ciency. The EMI-based methods were more effective than the magnetometer for intrinsic discrimination ability. The higher signal-to-noise ratio, denser coverage, and more precise positioning of the EM-array data resulted in fewer false positives than the EMI cart. When depth constraints from the magnetometer data were used to constrain the EMI fits through cooperative inversion, discrimination performance improved considerably. The wide-band EMI sensor was deployed in a cued-interrogation mode over a subset of anomalies. This produced the highestquality data because of collecting the densest data around each target and the additional late time-decay information available with the wide-band sensor. When the depth from the magnetometer was used as a constraint in the cooperative inversion process, all 4.2-inch mortars were recovered before any false positives were encountered.