2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.03.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Two dimensional joint inversion of direct current resistivity, radio-magnetotelluric and seismic refraction data: An application from Bafra Plain, Turkey

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We apply the Gauss–Newton optimization algorithm to estimate the model parameter correction vector, and cooling approximation is used to estimate the regularization parameters [ 46 ]. Regarding the joint inversion approach, the cross-gradient (structural) constraint is applied as suggested by Gallardo and Meju [ 11 ] and Ismail et al [ 16 , 17 ]. The cross-gradient algorithm considers that the gradient of the model parameters in the joint inversion must be parallel, non-parallel, or equal to zero, which are essential criteria required to satisfy the algorithm.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We apply the Gauss–Newton optimization algorithm to estimate the model parameter correction vector, and cooling approximation is used to estimate the regularization parameters [ 46 ]. Regarding the joint inversion approach, the cross-gradient (structural) constraint is applied as suggested by Gallardo and Meju [ 11 ] and Ismail et al [ 16 , 17 ]. The cross-gradient algorithm considers that the gradient of the model parameters in the joint inversion must be parallel, non-parallel, or equal to zero, which are essential criteria required to satisfy the algorithm.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it is unusual to have a unique solution due to the ill-posed characteristics of the most geophysical inverse problem. To reduce uncertainties associated with the inversion of a dataset belonging to a single geophysical method, many researchers have applied the concept of local optimization methods and joint inversion [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ] or data integration of more than one method, which provides better model resolutions than individual inversions [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ]. For the local optimization method, the structural data coupling approach, which involves the cross-gradient constraint method, was applied [ 11 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These assumptions can be proven by comparison of SR data with borehole measurements, such as seismic crosswell tomography. Actually, the SR method is commonly used in groundwater and contaminated site investigation (Carpenter et al, 1991;Elgamal et al, 2004;Soupios et al, 2007;Carpenter et al, 2013;Vafidis et al, 2014;Demirci et al, 2017) because of its relative simplicity and adaptability for shallow zone investigation. Moreover, when the target of the investigation is the definition of possible velocity anomalies related to localized geological or geo-mechanical variations within the survey area, the seismic tomography (ST) represents an additional tool to be used.…”
Section: Sr and St Explorationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the magnetotelluric data will have reasonable sensitivity to the thickness of the top layer, and this information will help to constrain the seismic model, which in turn helps to constrain the thickness of the second layer. Thus in a real-world joint inversion, it is not always as clear which method dominates the resolution properties, and in many cases, different methods drive the inversion in different part of the model domain (Jegen et al 2009;Heincke et al 2014;Demirci et al 2017). I will discuss some of these issues in the application section; for now I will continue with this simplistic example, as it distils many important aspects of joint inversion.…”
Section: Structural Couplingmentioning
confidence: 99%