1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 61, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 61 Number 1
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Based on the line integral (LI) and maximum difference reduction (MDR) methods, an automated iterative forward modelling scheme (LI‐MDR algorithm) is developed for the inversion of 2D bedrock topography from a gravity anomaly profile for heterogeneous sedimentary basins. The unknown basin topography can be smooth as for intracratonic basins or discontinuous as for rift and strike‐slip basins. In case studies using synthetic data, the new algorithm can invert the sedimentary basins bedrock depth within a mean accuracy better than 5% when the gravity anomaly data have an accuracy of better than 0.5 mGal. The main characteristics of the inversion algorithm include: (1) the density contrast of sedimentary basins can be constant or vary horizontally and/or vertically in a very broad but known manner; (2) three inputs are required: the measured gravity anomaly, accuracy level and the density contrast function, (3) the simplification that each gravity station has only one bedrock depth leads to an approach to perform rapid inversions using the forward modelling calculated by LI. The inversion process stops when the residual anomalies (the observed minus the calculated) falls within an ‘error envelope’ whose amplitude is the input accuracy level. The inversion algorithm offers in many cases the possibility of performing an agile 2D gravity inversion on basins with heterogeneous sediments. Both smooth and discontinuous bedrock topography with steep spatial gradients can be well recovered. Limitations include: (1) for each station position, there is only one corresponding point vertically down at the basement; and (2) the largest error in inverting bedrock topography occurs at the deepest points.

© 2012 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01046.x
2012-02-21
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01046.x
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AbbottR.E. and LouieJ.N.2000. Depth to bedrock using gravimetry in the Reno and Carson City, Nevada, area basins. Geophysics 65, 340–350.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AnnecchioneM.A., ChouteauM. and KeatingP.2001. Gravity interpretation of bedrock topography: The case of the Oak Ridges Moraine, southern Ontario, Canada. Journal of Applied Geophysics 47, 63–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. AsterR.C., BorchersB. and ThurberC. H.2005. Parameter Estimation and Inverse Problems . Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam .
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BarbosaV.C.F., SilvaJ.B.C. and MedeirosW.E.1997. Gravity inversion of basement relief using approximate equality constraints on depths. Geophysics 62, 1745–1757.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BarbosaV.C.F., SilvaJ.B.C. and MedeirosW.E.1999a. Gravity inversion of a discontinuous relief stabilized by weighted smoothness constraints on depth. Geophysics 64, 1429–1437.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. BarbosaV.C.F., SilvaJ.B.C. and MedeirosW.E.1999b. Stable inversion of gravity anomalies of sedimentary basins with nonsmooth basement reliefs and arbitrary density contrast variations. Geophysics 64, 754–764.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. BellR.E., ChildersV.A., ArkoR.A., BlankenshipD.D. and BrozenaJ.M.1999. Airborne gravity and precise positioning for geological applications. Journal of Geophysical Research 104 (B7), 15281–15292.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bhaskara RaoD.1986. Modeling of sedimentary basins from gravity anomalies with variable density contrast. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 84, 207–212.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bhaskara RaoD. and Mohan RaoC.P.V.N.J.1999. Two‐dimensional interpretation of gravity anomalies over sedimentary basins with an exponential decrease of density contrast with depth. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences (Earth and Planetary Sciences) 108, 99–106.
  10. BlakelyR.J.1995. Potential Theory in Gravity & Magnetic Applications . Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. BottM.H.P.1960. The use of rapid digital computing methods for direct gravity interpretation of sedimentary basins. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 3, 63–67.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. CampilloM., GarielJ.C., AkiK. and Sanchez‐SesmaF.J.1989. Destructive ground motion in Mexico City: Source, path, and site effects during the great 1985 earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 79, 1718–1735.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. ChaiY. and HinzeW.J.1988. Gravity inversion of an interface above which the density contrast varies exponentially with depth. Geophysics 53, 837–845.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. ChakravarthiV. and SundararajanN.2004. Ridge regression algorithm for gravity inversion of fault structures with variable density. Geophysics 69, 1394–1404.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. CorbatóC.E.1965. A least‐squares procedure for gravity interpretation. Geophysics 30, 228–233.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. DanesZ.F.1960. On a successive approximation method for interpreting gravity anomalies. Geophysics 25, 1215–1228.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. FergusonJ.F., FelchR.N., AikenC.L.V., OldowJ.S. and DockeryH.1988. Models of the Bouguer gravity and geologic structure at Yucca Flat, Nevada. Geophysics 53, 231–244.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. García‐AbdeslemJ., RomoJ.M., Gómez‐TreviñoE., Ramírez‐HernándezJ., Esparza‐HernándezF.J. and Flores‐LunaC.F.2005. A constrained 2D gravity model of the Sebastián Vizcaíno Basin, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Geophysical Prospecting 53, 755–765.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. JachensR.C. and MoringB.C.1990. Maps of thickness of Cenozoic deposits and isostatic residual gravity over basement in Nevada. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90–404.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. LastB.J. and KubikK.1983. Compact gravity inversion. Geophysics 48, 713–721.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lavrent’evM.M., RomanovV.G. and ShishatskiiS.P.1986. Ill‐posed problems of mathematical physics and analysis: Translations of Mathematical Monographs, 64, American Mathematical Society, Providence , Rhode Island , 290 pp.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. LeãoJ.W.D., MenezesP.T.L., BeltrãoJ.F. and SilvaJ.B.C.1996. Gravity inversion of basement relief constrained by the knowledge of depth at isolated points. Geophysics 61, 1702–1714.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. LitinskyV.A.1989. Concept of effective density: Key to gravity depth determinations for sedimentary basins. Geophysics 54, 1474–1482.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. MarqardtD.W.1963. An algorithm for least‐squares estimation of non‐linear parameters. Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics11, 431–441.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Northwest Geophysical Associates, Inc
    Northwest Geophysical Associates, Inc . 2004. GM‐SYS Gravity/Magnetic Modeling Software, User's Guide, Version 4.9, 1–101.
  26. OldenburgD.W.1974. The inversion and interpretation of gravity anomalies. Geophysics 39, 526–536.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. OlivaS.R. and RavazzoliC.L.1997. Complex polynomials for the computation of 2D gravity anomalies. Geophysical Prospecting 45, 809–818.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. ParkerR.1973. The rapid calculation of potential anomalies. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 31, 447–455.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. PilkingtonM. and CrossleyD.J.1986. Determination of crustal interface topography from potential fields. Geophysics 51, 1277–1284.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. PohánkaV.1988. Optimum expression for computation of the gravity field of a homogeneous polyhedral body. Geophysical Prospecting 36, 733–751.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. PortniaguineO. and ZhdanovM.S.1999. Focusing geophysical inversion images. Geophysics 64, 874–887.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. RamosF.M., Campos VelhoH.F., CarvalhoJ.C. and FerreiraN.J.1999. Novel approaches to entropic regularization. Inverse Problems 15, 1139–1148.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. RaoC.V., PramanikA.G., KumarG.V.R.K. and RajuM.L.1994. Gravity interpretation of sedimentary basins with hyperbolic density contrast. Geophysical Prospecting 42, 825–839.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. ReamerS.K. and FergusonJ.F.1989. Regularized two‐dimensional Fourier gravity inversion method with application to the Silent Canyon caldera, Nevada. Geophysics 54, 486–496.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. RudinL.I., OsherS. and FatemiE.1992. Nonlinear total variation based noise removal algorithms. Physica D60, 259–268.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. SchaeferD.H.1983. Gravity survey of Dixie Valley, west‐central Nevada. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 82–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. SilvaJ.B.C., CostaD.C.L. and BarbosaV.C.F.2006. Gravity inversion of basement relief and estimation of density contrast variation with depth. Geophysics 71, no. 5, J51–J58.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. SilvaJ.B.C., OliveiraA.S. and BarbosaV.C.F.2010. Gravity inversion of 2D basement relief using entropic regularization. Geophysics 75, no. 3, I29–I35.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. SkeelsD.C.1947. Ambiguity in gravity interpretation. Geophysics 12, 43–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. SmithR.T., ZoltaniC.K., KlemG.J. and ColemanM.W.1991. Reconstruction of the tomographic images from sparse data sets by a new finite element maximum entropy approach. Applied Optics 30, 573–582.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. StudingerM., BellR.E., BlankenshipD.D., FinnC.A., ArkoR.A., MorseD.L. and JoughinI.2001. Subglacial sediments: A regional geological template for ice flow in west Antarctica. Geophysical Research Letters 28, 3493–3496.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. TannerJ.G.1967. An automated method of gravity interpretation. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 13, 339–347.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. TikhonovA.N. and ArseninV.Y.1977. Solution of Ill‐posed Problems . V.H. Winston and Sons, 258 pp.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. VogelC.R. and OmanM.E.1998. A fast, robust total variation based reconstruction of noisy, blurred images. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 7, 813–824.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. WebringM.1985. SAKI: A Fortran program for generalized linear inversion of gravity and magnetic profiles. USGS Open File Report 85–122, 1–29.
  46. ZhdanovM.S.2002. Geophysical Inverse Theory and Regularization Problems. Methods in Geochemistry and Geophysics, 36 . Amsterdam , Elsevier Science B.V., 609 pp.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. ZhouX.2009. General line integrals for gravity anomalies of irregular 2D masses with horizontally and vertically dependent density contrast. Geophysics 74, no. 2, I1–I7.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. ZhouX.2010. Analytical solution of gravity anomaly of irregular 2D masses with density contrast varying as a 2D polynomial function. Geophysics 75, no. 2, I11–I19.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01046.x
Loading
Gravity inversion of 2D bedrock topography for heterogeneous sedimentary basins based on line integral and maximum difference reduction methods
Geophysical Prospecting 61, 220 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01046.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01046.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01046.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): 2D gravity inversion; Heterogeneous sedimentary basin; Line integral; Maximum difference reduction

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