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

Abstract

Abstract

Quantification of non‐uniqueness and uncertainty is important for transient electromagnetism (TEM). To address this issue, we develop a trans‐dimensional Bayesian inversion schema for TEM data interpretation. The trans‐dimensional posterior probability density (PPD) offers a solution to model selection and quantifies parameter uncertainty resulting from the model selection from all possible models rather than determining a single model. We use the reversible‐jump Markov chain Monte Carlo sampler to draw ensembles of models to approximate PPD. In addition to providing reasonable model selection, we address the reliability of the inversion results for uncertainty analysis. This strategy offers reasonable guidance when interpreting the inversion results. We make the following improvements in this paper. First, in terms of algorithmic acceleration, we use the nonlinear optimization inversion results as the initial model and implement the multi‐chain parallel method. Second, we develop double factors to control the sampling step size of the proposed distribution, so that the sampling models cover the high‐probability region of the parameter space as much as possible. Finally, we provide the potential scale reduction factor‐ convergence criteria to assess the convergence of the samples and ensure the rationality of the output models. The proposed methodology is first tested on synthetic data and subsequently applied to a field dataset. The TEM inversion results show that probability inversion can provide reliable references for data interpretation through uncertainty analysis.

© 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12299
2024-07-21
2026-02-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12299
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Agostinetti, N. P. & Malinverno, A. (2010) Receiver function inversion by trans‐dimensional Monte Carlo sampling. Geophysical Journal International, 181(2), 858–872. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2010.04530.x
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen, D. & Anonymous (2012) Towed transient electromagnetic survey for groundwater investigation ‐ challenges and solutions. In: 22nd International Geophysical Conference and Exhibition, Collingwood, Victoria. pp. 1–4.
  3. Amey, R. M. J., Hooper, A. & Walters, R. J. (2018) A Bayesian method for incorporating self‐similarity into earthquake slip inversions. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 123(7), 6052–6071. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1029/2017JB015316
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Andersen, K. R., Wan, L., Grombacher, D., Lin, T. & Auken, E. (2018) Studies of parameter correlations in surface NMR using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Near Surface Geophysics, 16(2), 206–217. Available from: http://doi.org/10.3997/1873‐0604.2017064
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Auken, E., Jørgensen, F. & Sørensen, K. I. (2018) Large‐scale TEM investigation for groundwater. Exploration Geophysics, 34(3), 188–194. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1071/EG03188
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Backus, G. E. (1988) Bayesian inference in geomagnetism. Geophysical Journal International, 92(1), 125–142. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.1988.tb01127.x
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bagnardi, M. & Hooper, A. (2018) Inversion of surface deformation data for rapid estimates of source parameters and uncertainties: A Bayesian approach. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 19(7), 2194–2211. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1029/2018GC007585
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bayes, T. (1763) An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. By the late Rev. Mr. Bayes, F. R. S. communicated by Mr. Price, in a letter to John Canton, A. M. F. R. S. Philosophical Transactions, 53, 370–418.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Blatter, D., Key, K., Ray, A., Foley, N., Tulaczyk, S. & Auken, E. (2018) Trans‐dimensional Bayesian inversion of airborne transient EM data from Taylor Glacier, Antarctica. Geophysical Journal International, 214(3), 1919–1936. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggy255
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Brooks, S. P. & Gelman, A. (1998) General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 7(4), 434–455. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1080/10618600.1998.10474787
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, J., Hoversten, G. M., Vasco, D., Rubin, Y. & Hou, Z. (2007) A Bayesian model for gas saturation estimation using marine seismic AVA and CSEM data. Geophysics, 72(2), WA85–WA95. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1190/1.2435082
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen, J., Kemna, A. & Hubbard, S. S. (2008) A comparison between Gauss‐Newton and Markov‐chain Monte Carlo–based methods for inverting spectral induced‐polarization data for Cole‐Cole parameters. Geophysics, 73(6), F247–F259. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1190/1.2976115
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Constable, S. C., Parker, R. L. & ConsAable, C. G. (1987) Occam's inversion: a practical algorithm for generating smooth models from electromagnetic sounding data. Geophysics, 52(3), 267–462. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442303
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Debski, W. (2010) Probabilistic inverse theory. Advances in Geophysics, 52, 1–102. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1016/S0065‐2687(10)52001‐6
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Denison, D. G. T., Mallick, B. K. & Smith, A. F. M. (1998) Automatic Bayesian curve fitting. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 60, 333–350. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1111/1467‐9868.00128
     [Google Scholar]
  16. El‐Kaliouby, H. & Abdalla, O. (2015) Application of time‐domain electromagnetic method in mapping saltwater intrusion of a coastal alluvial aquifer, North Oman. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 115, 59–64. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2015.02.003
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Gallagher, K. (2012) Transdimensional inverse thermal history modeling for quantitative thermochronology. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 117(B2), n/a–n/a. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1029/2011JB008825
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Gao, Z., Yin, C., Qi, Y., Zhang, B., Ren, X. & Lu, Y. (2018) Transdimensional Bayesian inversion of time‐domain airborne EM data. Applied Geophysics, 15(2), 318–331. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1007/s11770‐018‐0684‐7
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gehrmann, R. A. S., Dettmer, J., Schwalenberg, K., Engels, M., Dosso, S. E. & Özmaral, A. (2015) Trans‐dimensional Bayesian inversion of controlled‐source electromagnetic data in the German North Sea. Geophysical Prospecting, 63(6), 1314–1333. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1111/1365‐2478.12308
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Gelman, A. & Rubin, D. B. (1992) Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Statistical Science, 7(4), 457–472. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177011136
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Gelman, A., Roberts, G. & Gilks, W. R. (1996) Efficient metropolis jumping rules. In: Bernardo, J. M., Berger, J. O., Dawid, A. P. & SmithF. M. (Eds.) Bayesian statistics, vol. 5, pp. 599–607.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Gilks, W. R., Richardson, S. & Spiegelhalter, D. (1996) Markov chain Monte Carlo in practice. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Green, P. J. (1995) Reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo computation and Bayesian model determination. Biometrika, 82(4), 711–732. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/82.4.711
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Guo, Z., Xue, G., Liu, J. & Wu, X. (2020) Electromagnetic methods for mineral exploration in China: a review. Ore Geology Reviews, 118, 103357. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2020.103357
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Haario, H., Laine, M., Lehtinen, M., Saksman, E. & Tamminen, J. (2004) Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for high dimensional inversion in remote sensing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 66(3), 591–607. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐9868.2004.02053.x
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Haario, H., Laine, M., Mira, A. & Saksman, E. (2006) DRAM: efficient adaptive MCMC. Statistics and Computing, 16(4), 339–354. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1007/s11222‐006‐9438‐0
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Hastings, W. K. (1970) Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika, 57(1), 97–109. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/57.1.97
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Hoang, V. H., Quek, J. H. & Schwab, C. (2020) Analysis of a multilevel Markov chain Monte Carlo finite element method for Bayesian inversion of log‐normal diffusions. Inverse Problems, 36(3), 35021. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1088/1361‐6420/ab2a1e
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Jackson, D. D. & Matsu'Ura, M. (1985) A Bayesian approach to nonlinear inversion. Journal of Geophysical Research, 90(B1), 581–591. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1029/JB090iB01p00581
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Jiang, X., Zhang, W. & Yang, H. (2022) The research on Bayesian inference for geophysical inversion. Reviews of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, 53(2), 159–171. Available from: http://doi.org/10.19975/j.dqyxx.2021‐042
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Killingbeck, S. F., Booth, A. D., Livermore, P. W., Bates, C. R. & West, L. J. (2020) Characterisation of subglacial water using a constrained transdimensional Bayesian transient electromagnetic inversion. Solid Earth, 11(1), 75–94. Available from: http://doi.org/10.5194/se‐11‐75‐2020
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Kimeldorf, G. S. & Wahba, G. (1970) A correspondence between Bayesian estimation on stochastic processes and smoothing by splines. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 41(2), 495–502.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Koller, D. & Friedman, N. (2009) Probabilistic graphical models: Principles and techniques. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Kontar, E. A. & Ozorovich, Y. R. (2006) Geo‐electromagnetic survey of the fresh/salt water interface in the coastal southeastern Sicily. Continental Shelf Research, 26(7), 843–851. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2005.12.012
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Laloy, E. & Vrugt, J. A. (2012) High‐dimensional posterior exploration of hydrologic models using multiple‐try DREAM(ZS) and high‐performance computing. Water Resources Research, 48(1). W01526, pp. 1–18.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lee, K. H., Liu, G. & Morrison, H. F. (1989) A new approach to modeling the electromagnetic response of conductive media. Geophysics, 54(9), 1180–1192. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442753
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Li, H., Xue, G. & Zhang, L. (2021) Accelerated Bayesian inversion of transient electromagnetic data using MCMC subposteriors. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 59(12), 10000–10010. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2020.3035390
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Malinverno, A. (2002) Parsimonious Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo inversion in a nonlinear geophysical problem. Geophysical Journal International, 151(3), 675–688. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365‐246X.2002.01847.x
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Menke, W. (2012) Geophysical data analysis: Discrete inverse theory. Boston: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A. W., Rosenbluth, M. N., Teller, A. H. & Teller, E. (1953) Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 21(6), 1087–1092. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1063/1.1699114
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Minsley, B. J. (2011) A trans‐dimensional Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm for model assessment using frequency‐domain electromagnetic data. Geophysical Journal International, 187(1), 252–272. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2011.05165.x
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Munkholm, M. S. & Auken, E. (1996) Electromagnetic noise contamination on transient electromagnetic soundings in culturally disturbed environments. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 1, 119–127
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Parker, R. L. (1994) Geophysical inverse theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Peng, R., Yogeshwar, P., Liu, Y. & Hu, X. (2021) Transdimensional Markov Chain Monte Carlo joint inversion of direct current resistivity and transient electromagnetic data. Geophysical Journal International, 224(2), 1429–1442. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa535
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Personal communication . (2018) Report on the Geological stability evaluation in Shengjing area. Shandong Provincial Geo‐mineral Engineering Institute. pp. 1–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Piao, H. (1990) The theory of electromagnetic sounding. Beijing: Geological Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Ray, A. & Key, K. (2012) Bayesian inversion of marine CSEM data with a trans‐dimensional self parametrizing algorithm. Geophysical Journal International, 191(3), 1135–1151. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2012.05677.x
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Ray, A., Alumbaugh, D. L., Hoversten, G. M. & Key, K. (2013) Robust and accelerated Bayesian inversion of marine controlled‐source electromagnetic data using parallel tempering. Geophysics, 78(6), E271–E280. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1190/geo2013‐0128.1
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Sambridge, M. & Mosegaard, K. (2002) Monte Carlo methods in geophysical inverse problems. Reviews of Geophysics, 40(3), 1–3. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1029/2000RG000089
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Sambridge, M. (2014) A parallel tempering algorithm for probabilistic sampling and multimodal optimization. Geophysical Journal International, 196(1), 357–374. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt342
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Sapia, V., Viezzoli, A., Jørgensen, F., Oldenborger, G. A. & Marchetti, M. (2014) The impact on geological and hydrogeological mapping results of moving from ground to airborne TEM. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 19(1), 53–66. Available from: http://doi.org/10.2113/JEEG19.1.53
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Sen, M. K. & Stoffa, P. L. (1996) Bayesian inference, Gibbs' sampler and uncertainty estimation in geophysical inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 44, 313–350.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Strack, K. M., Lüschen, E. & Kötz, A. W. (1990) Long‐offset transient electromagnetic (LOTEM) depth soundings applied to crustal studies in the Black Forest and Swabian Alb, Federal Republic of Germany. Geophysics, 55(7), 834–842. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442897
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Sun, H., Li, X., Li, S., Qi, Z., Su, M. & Xue, Y. (2012) Multi‐component and multi‐array TEM detection in karst tunnels. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 9(4), 359–373. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1088/1742‐2132/9/4/359
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Sun, H. (2013) Three‐dimensional transient electromagnetic responses of water bearing structures in tunnels and prediction of water inrush sources. Jinan: Shandong University.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Sun, H., Zhang, N., Liu, S., Li, D., Chen, C. & Ye, Q. et al. (2019) L1‐norm based nonlinear inversion of transient electromagnetic data. Chinese Journal of Geophysics‐Chinese Edition, 62(12), 4860–4873
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Tarantola, A. & Valette, B. (1982) Inverse problems = quest for information. Journal of Geophysics, 50, 159–170
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Tarantola, A. (1987) Inverse problem theory: methods for data fitting and model parameter estimation. New York: Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Trainor‐Guitton, W. & Hoversten, G. M. (2011) Stochastic inversion for electromagnetic geophysics: practical challenges and improving convergence efficiency. Geophysics, 76(6), F373–F386. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1190/geo2010‐0223.1
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Wu, J., Chen, X., Yang, Y., Zhi, Q., Wang, X. & Zhang, J., et al. (2021) Application of TEM based on HTS SQUID magnetometer in deep geological structure exploration in the Baiyun Gold Deposit, NE China. Journal of Earth Science, 32(1), 1–7. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1007/s12583‐020‐1086‐3
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Wu, J., Zhi, Q., Deng, X., Wang, X., Chen, X., Zhao, Y. & Huang, Y. (2022) Deep gold exploration with SQUID TEM in the Qingchengzi Orefield, Eastern Liaoning, Northeast China. Minerals, 12(1), 102. Available from: http://doi.org/10.3390/min12010102
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Xue, G. Q., Yan, Y. J., Li, X. & Di, Q. Y. (2007) Transient electromagnetic S‐inversion in tunnel prediction. Geophysical Research Letters, 34(18), L18403, pp. 1–5.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Yang, D. K. & Hu, X. Y. (2008) Inversion of noisy data by probabilistic methodology. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 51(03), 901–907.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Yin, C. & Piao, H. (1991) Study on apparent resistivity definition of electromagnetic sounding. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 15(04), 290–299.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Yin, C. C., Qi, Y. F., Liu, Y. H. & Cai, J. (2014) Trans‐dimensional Bayesian inversion of frequency‐domain airborne EM data. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 57(09), 2971–2980. Available from: http://doi.org/10.6038/cjg20140922
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Yu, X. (2018) Inversion of airborne time‐domain electromagnetic data based on Bayesian theory. Chengdu: Chengdu University of Technology.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Yu, X., Lu, C. & Wang, X. (2020) Adaptive trans‐dimensional Bayesian inversion of airborne time‐domain electromagnetic data. Progress in Geophysics, 35(5), 2023–2032. Available from: http://doi.org/10.6038/pg2020DD0455
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Zhang, G., Wang, D., Yin, X. & Li, N. (2011) Study on prestack seismic inversion using Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Chinese Journal of Geophysics (in Chinese), 54(11), 2926–2932. Available from: http://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.0001‐5733.2011.11.022
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Zhdanov, M. S. (2015) Inverse theory and applications in geophysics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Ziegler, M. O. & Heidbach, O. (2023) Bayesian quantification and reduction of uncertainties in 3D geomechanical‐numerical models. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 128(1), e2022JB024855. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1029/2022JB024855
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Ziolkowski, A., Hobbs, B. A. & Wright, D. (2007) Multitransient electromagnetic demonstration survey in France. Geophysics, 72(4), F197–F209. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1190/1.2735802
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12299
Loading
Bayesian inversion and uncertainty analysis of transient electromagnetic data
Near Surface Geophysics 22, 490 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12299
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12299
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12299
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): engineering; imaging; Inversion; TEM; uncertainty

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