2016
DOI: 10.1785/0120150271
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SALSA3D: A Tomographic Model of Compressional Wave Slowness in the Earth’s Mantle for Improved Travel‐Time Prediction and Travel‐Time Prediction Uncertainty

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It should be noted that the ability to calculate the model posterior covariance matrix, is a first step towards putting error bars in moderate size tomographic models, and thus allowing more accurate quantitative interpretation of the tomographic models. This further requires realistically determining the prior data errors and model covariance (e.g., Tarantola, 1987;Nolet et al, 1999;Rawlinson et al, 2014), and recently, significant effort has been focused on improving the determination of these priors (e.g., Bodin et al, 2012;Duputel et al, 2012Duputel et al, , 2014Rodi & Myers, 2013;Voronin et al, 2014;Ballard et al, 2016).Furthermore, we show that the matrix decomposition, in combination with a recently developed singular value decomposition algorithm, allow the computation of the entire range of singular values of both the well/over-determined and the under-determined subsystems giving insight into the problem. For example, it reveals the exact nature of the gradual decay of the singular values, which is of considerable interest for the efficient and accurate dimensionality reduction of the problem by means of low rank approximations (e.g., Voronin et al, 2014, 2015Gu 2015.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It should be noted that the ability to calculate the model posterior covariance matrix, is a first step towards putting error bars in moderate size tomographic models, and thus allowing more accurate quantitative interpretation of the tomographic models. This further requires realistically determining the prior data errors and model covariance (e.g., Tarantola, 1987;Nolet et al, 1999;Rawlinson et al, 2014), and recently, significant effort has been focused on improving the determination of these priors (e.g., Bodin et al, 2012;Duputel et al, 2012Duputel et al, , 2014Rodi & Myers, 2013;Voronin et al, 2014;Ballard et al, 2016).Furthermore, we show that the matrix decomposition, in combination with a recently developed singular value decomposition algorithm, allow the computation of the entire range of singular values of both the well/over-determined and the under-determined subsystems giving insight into the problem. For example, it reveals the exact nature of the gradual decay of the singular values, which is of considerable interest for the efficient and accurate dimensionality reduction of the problem by means of low rank approximations (e.g., Voronin et al, 2014, 2015Gu 2015.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, parallel dense Cholesky factorization using such system has been utilized to solve large, at the time, seismic tomography inverse problems (Boschi 2003;Soldati & Boschi 2005;Soldati et al, 2006). More recently, a dense Cholesky solver that stores and fetches the matrices in significantly slower external memory such as hard drives (also known as out-of-the-core capability; D"Azevedo & Dongarra, 2000), has been used to calculate the resolution and covariance matrix for a global tomography model with ~230K parameters (Hipp et al, 2011;Ballard et al, 2016). This particular study required about 12 hours of computation time, using 400 threads distributed over 10 computational nodes, that had access to main memory that varied from 64 GB to 768 GB per node.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of the highest P wave path coverage density in Eurasia, the velocity model SALSA3D is most reliable for the region. The uncertainty of the model travel time prediction for Eurasia is on the order of 0.3 to 0.9 s [Ballard et al, 2016b;Figure 9b]. As a result, I do not expect the error introduced by the uncertainty of the velocity model to be significant.…”
Section: Problem Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Efforts to mitigate this have evolved from correction terms for individual paths (e.g. Murphy et al, 2005), to regionalized models for traveltime calculation (Myers et al, 2010), to global 3-dimensional models Ballard et al, 2016). We 55 now have at our disposal a 3-dimensional global P-and S-wave velocity model anticipated to improve significantly the representation of traveltimes in central Asia .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%