1887
Volume 22, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Multi‐channel analysis of surface waves is a seismic method employed to obtain useful information about shear‐wave velocities in the near surface. A fundamental step in this methodology is the extraction of dispersion curves from dispersion spectra, with the latter usually obtained by applying specific processing algorithms onto the recorded shot gathers. Although the extraction process can be automated to some extent, it usually requires extensive quality control, which can be arduous for large datasets. We present a novel approach that leverages deep learning to identify a direct mapping between seismic shot gathers and their associated dispersion curves (both fundamental and first higher order modes), therefore by‐passing the need to compute dispersion spectra. Given a site of interest, a set of 1D compressional and shear velocities and density models are created using prior knowledge of the local geology; pairs of seismic shot gathers and Rayleigh‐wave phase dispersion curves are then numerically modelled and used to train a simplified residual network. The proposed approach is shown to achieve high‐quality predictions of dispersion curves on a synthetic test dataset and is, ultimately, successfully deployed on a field dataset. Various uncertainty quantification and convolutional neural network visualization techniques are also presented to assess the quality of the inference process and better understand the underlying learning process of the network. The predicted dispersion curves are inverted for both the synthetic and field data; in the latter case, the resulting shear‐wave velocity model is plausible and consistent with prior geological knowledge of the area. Finally, a comparison between the manually picked fundamental modes with the predictions from our model allows for a benchmark of the performance of the proposed workflow.

© 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2024 The Authors. Near Surface Geophysics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12298
2024-07-21
2025-11-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12298
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/nsg/22/4/nsg12298.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12298&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Abdar, M., Pourpanah, F., Hussain, S., Rezazadegan, D., Liu, L., Ghavamzadeh, M., et al. (2021) A review of uncertainty quantification in deep learning: techniques, applications and challenges. Information Fusion, 76, 243–297. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2021.05.008
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alyousuf, T.Y., & Colombo, D. (2019) Advances in Surface‐Wave Analysis Using Single Sensor Seismic Data and Deep Neural Network Algorithm for Near Surface Characterization. Day 2 Tue, November 12, 2019, D021S056R002. https://doi.org/10.2118/197536‐MS
  3. Baglari, D., Dey, A. & Taipodia, J. (2018) A state‐of‐the‐art review of passive MASW survey for subsurface profiling. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 3(1), 66. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/S41062‐018‐0171‐2
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Boaga, J., Cassiani, G., Strobbia, C.L. & Vignoli, G. (2013) Mode misidentification in Rayleigh waves: ellipticity as a cause and a cure. Geophysics, 78(4), 1JA‐Z103. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/GEO2012‐0194.1/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/FIGURE22.JPEG
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Molnar, C. (2022) Interpretable Machine Learning: A Guide for Making Black Box Models Explainable (2nd ed.). christophm.github.io/interpretable-ml-book/
  6. Dunkin, J.W. (1965) Computation of modal solutions in layered, elastic media at high frequencies. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 55(2), 335–358. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0550020335
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Foti, S., Hollender, F., Garofalo, F., Albarello, D., Asten, M., Bard, P.‐Y., et al. (2018) Guidelines for the good practice of surface wave analysis: a product of the InterPACIFIC project. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16(6), 2367–2420. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518‐017‐0206‐7
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Gal, Y. & Ghahramani, Z. (2016) Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learning. In M. F.Balcan & K. Q.Weinberger (Eds.), Proceedings of The 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning. (Vol. 48, pp. 1050–1059). PMLR. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v48/gal16.html
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Gardner, G.H.F., Gardner, L.W. & Gregory, A.R. (1974) Formation velocity and density—the diagnostic basics for stratigraphic traps. Geophysics, 39(6), 770–780. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440465
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Garofalo, F., Foti, S., Hollender, F., Bard, P.Y., Cornou, C., Cox, B.R., et al. (2016) InterPACIFIC project: comparison of invasive and non‐invasive methods for seismic site characterization. Part I: Intra‐comparison of surface wave methods. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 82, 222–240. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.12.010
     [Google Scholar]
  11. He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2015). Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition.
  12. Kaul, A., Bilsby, P.J., Misbah, A. & Abubakar, A. (2021) Machine‐learning‐driven dispersion curve picking for surface‐wave analysis, modelling, and inversion. In: 82nd EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition. Utrecht, the Netherlands, EAGE. pp. 1–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.202010598
  13. Luu, K. (2020) disba: Numba‐accelerated computation of surface wave dispersion. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3987395
  14. Luu, K. (2021) evodcinv: inversion of dispersion curves using evolutionary algorithms. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5775193
  15. Moro, G.D. (2015) Inversion and Joint Inversion. In: Surface wave analysis for near surface applications. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 87–102. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978‐0‐12‐800770‐9.00005‐4
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Naskar, T. & Kumar, J. (2022) MATLAB codes for generating dispersion images for ground exploration using different multichannel analysis of surface wave transforms. Geophysics, 87(3), F15–F24. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2020‐0928.1
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Ólafsdóttir, E.Á., Bessason, B. & Erlingsson, S. (2019) Application of MASW in the South Iceland seismic zone. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. ICESD 2017. Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering. Cham, Springer. pp. 53–66. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐319‐78187‐7_5
  18. Pan, Y., Gao, L. & Bohlen, T. (2019) High‐resolution characterization of near‐surface structures by surface‐wave inversions: from dispersion curve to full waveform. Surveys in Geophysics, 40(2), 167–195. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712‐019‐09508‐0
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Park, C.B. & Carnevale, M. (2010) Optimum MASW Survey—Revisit after a decade of use. GeoFlorida, 2010, 1303–1312. https://doi.org/10.1061/41095(365)130
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Park, C.B., Miller, R.D., Xia, J. & Ivanov, J. (2007) Multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW)—active and passive methods. Leading Edge (Tulsa, OK), 26(1), 60–64. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2431832/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/60_1_F6.JPEG
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Penumadu, D. & Park, C.B. (2012) Multichannel Analysis of Surface Wave (MASW) Method for Geotechnical Site Characterization. American Society of Civil Engineers, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1061/40779(158)3
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Rahimi, S., Wood, C.M. & Teague, D.P. (2021) Performance of different transformation techniques for MASW data processing considering various site conditions, near‐field effects, and modal separation. Surveys in Geophysics, 42(5), 1197–1225. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712‐021‐09657‐1
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Rovetta, D., Kontakis, A. & Colombo, D. (2021) Application of a density‐based spatial clustering algorithm for fully automatic picking of surface‐wave dispersion curves. The Leading Edge, 40(9), 678–685. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/tle40090678.1
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Socco, L.V. & Strobbia, C. (2004) Surface‐wave method for near‐surface characterization: a tutorial. Near Surface Geophysics, 2(4), 165–185. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/1873‐0604.2004015
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Taipodia, J., Dey, A., Gaj, S. & Baglari, D. (2020) Quantification of the resolution of dispersion image in active MASW survey and automated extraction of dispersion curve. Computers & Geosciences, 135, 104360. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CAGEO.2019.104360
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Thorbecke, J.W. & Draganov, D. (2011) Finite‐difference modeling experiments for seismic interferometry. Geophysics, 76(6), H1–H18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2010‐0039.1
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Virieux, J. (2012) P‐SV wave propagation in heterogeneous media: velocity‐stress finite‐difference method. Geophysics, 51(4), 889–901. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442147
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Zeiler, M.D. & Fergus, R. (2013) Visualizing and understanding convolutional networks. In: Computer Vision – ECCV 2014. ECCV 2014. Lecture notes in computer science (Including subseries lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics), vol. 8689 LNCS. Cham, Springer. 818–833. Available from: https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1311.2901
  29. Zhang, S.X. & Chan, L.S. (2003) Possible effects of misidentified mode number on Rayleigh wave inversion. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 53(1), 17–29. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926‐9851(03)00014‐4
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Zheng, D. & Miao, X.G. (2014) Multimodal Rayleigh wave dispersion curve picking and inversion to build near surface shear wave velocity models. In: 76th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2014, Workshops. Utrecht, the Netherlands, EAGE. pp. 175–177. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.20140538/CITE/REFWORKS
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12298
Loading
Deep learning‐based extraction of surface wave dispersion curves from seismic shot gathers
Near Surface Geophysics 22, 421 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12298
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12298
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12298
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): inversion; multi‐channel analysis of surface wave; near‐surface; surface wave

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error