2022
DOI: 10.1109/tgrs.2022.3149139
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Role of Model Weighting Functions in the Gravity and DC Resistivity Inversion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Menke, 2012): boldm0.28embadbreak=mr0.28emgoodbreak+()Wm1ATboldAWnormalm1boldAnormalT+αboldWnormald1()bolddboldAmr,$$\begin{equation}{\bf{m}}\; = {{\bf{m}}_{\rm{r}}}{\rm{\;}} + \left( {{\bf{W}}_{\rm{m}}^{ - 1}{{\bf{A}}^{\rm{T}}}} \right){\left( {{\bf{AW}}_{\rm{m}}^{ - 1}{{\bf{A}}^{\rm{T}}} + \alpha {{\bf{W}}_{\rm{d}}}} \right)^{ - 1}}\left( {{\bf{d}} - {\bf{A}}{{\bf{m}}_{\rm{r}}}} \right),\end{equation}$$where W m is a model‐weighting matrix produced by the multiplication of compactness and depth‐weighting functions and Wd=0.28emI${{\bf{W}}_{\rm{d}}} = \;I$. This algorithm has been successfully manipulated for the inversion of DC resistivity (Varfinezhad et al., 2022), gravity (Varfinezhad & Ardestani, 2021), magnetic (Milano et al., 2021; Varfinezhad et al., 2020), and EM‐LIN (Parnow et al., 2021; Varfinezhad & Parnow, 2022) data.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Menke, 2012): boldm0.28embadbreak=mr0.28emgoodbreak+()Wm1ATboldAWnormalm1boldAnormalT+αboldWnormald1()bolddboldAmr,$$\begin{equation}{\bf{m}}\; = {{\bf{m}}_{\rm{r}}}{\rm{\;}} + \left( {{\bf{W}}_{\rm{m}}^{ - 1}{{\bf{A}}^{\rm{T}}}} \right){\left( {{\bf{AW}}_{\rm{m}}^{ - 1}{{\bf{A}}^{\rm{T}}} + \alpha {{\bf{W}}_{\rm{d}}}} \right)^{ - 1}}\left( {{\bf{d}} - {\bf{A}}{{\bf{m}}_{\rm{r}}}} \right),\end{equation}$$where W m is a model‐weighting matrix produced by the multiplication of compactness and depth‐weighting functions and Wd=0.28emI${{\bf{W}}_{\rm{d}}} = \;I$. This algorithm has been successfully manipulated for the inversion of DC resistivity (Varfinezhad et al., 2022), gravity (Varfinezhad & Ardestani, 2021), magnetic (Milano et al., 2021; Varfinezhad et al., 2020), and EM‐LIN (Parnow et al., 2021; Varfinezhad & Parnow, 2022) data.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this sense, note that previous formulation [34,35] becomes a particular case of this more general relationship, since β =N=3 holds only for homogeneous, spherical-like, source distributions. The good behaviour of this approach in compact inversions has been discussed and the role of an appropriate model weighting function has been proved to be even more important in joint inversions [47,48].…”
Section: B Separate Inversionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The compactness stabilizer (Last & Kubik, 1983) also known as the minimum support stabilizer (Port-niaguine & Zhdanov, 1999) has been borrowed and implemented by other researchers in various geophysical inversion methods (Ajo-Franklin et al, 2007;Stocco et al, 2009;Fei et al, 2018;Feng et al, 2020;Varfinezhad et al, 2020). As it was demonstrated by a number of researchers (Zhdanov & Tolstaya, 2004;Feng et al, 2020;Varfinezhad et al, 2022), this stabilizer is known to yield a compact or focused geophysical model with sharp boundaries. Apart from the inversion methods which produce focused images mentioned above, sparse geophysical inversion approaches derived from L p -norm (0 ≤ p ≤ 1) stabilization have been developed by many researchers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%