“…Due to the complexity of the inverse problem at hand, most techniques to date rely on simplifying assumptions, aiming at rendering a solution to the problem more tractable. These assumptions can be divided into five categories: a) assumptions regarding the dimensionality of the problem, whereby the original problem is reduced to a two-dimensional [17,20,22], or a one-dimensional problem [26]; b) assuming that the dominant portion of the wave energy on the ground surface is transported through Rayleigh waves, and thus, disregarding other wave types, such as compressional and shear waves, as is the case in the Spectral-Analysis-of-Surface-Waves (SASW) and its variants (MASW) [35]; c) inverting for only one parameter, as is done in [1,11,28,29], where inversion was attempted only for the shear wave velocity, assuming the compressional wave velocity (or an equivalent counterpart) is known; d) assumptions concerning the truncation boundaries, which are oftentimes, grossly simplified due to the complexity associated with the rigorous treatment of these boundaries [40]; and e) idealizing the soil body, which is a porous and lossy medium, as an elastic solid and neglecting its attenuative properties 1 [12]. Over the past decade, continued advances in both algorithms and computer architectures have allowed the gradual removal of the limitations of existing methodologies.…”