1887

Abstract

Summary

In this work, a 4th order DRP 2D elastic wave formulation with free surface boundary conditions is presented, extending methods of ). Staggered first-derivative stencils are derived and applied to the P-SV formulation of ). Performance is compared to the Taylor-series-derived staggered scheme of equal extent, demonstrating the versatility and universal benefits of spatial optimization. Implementation of both FD schemes is carried out using Devito, a domain-specific Python module and compiler for FD applications. Devito allows for model specification with a handful of high-level symbolic Python objects to build an FD operator, used to generate highly optimized C++ code at runtime via a series of intermediate representations, allowing for complex multi-stage optimizations. The high-level, symbolic nature of Devito ensures concise, readable model code and expedites workflow compared to model building with low-level languages, enabling rapid prototyping in hours as opposed to weeks or months without sacrificing underlying code quality. This work showcases the potential of symbolic computation for implementing non-conventional FD stencils, and the straightforwardness of doing so with Devito.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900660
2019-06-03
2020-05-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Juntunen, J. S. and Tsiboukis, T. D.
    (2000) ‘Reduction of Numerical Dispersion in FDTD Method Through Artificial Anisotropy’, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, 48(4), pp. 582–588.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Kim, I. S. and Hoefer, W. J. R.
    (1990) ‘Numerical dispersion characteristics and stability factor for the TD-FD method’, IEEE Electronics Letters, 26(7), pp. 485–487.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Liu, Y. and Sen, M. K.
    (2009) ‘A new time – space domain high-order finite-difference method for the acoustic wave equation’, Journal of Computational Physics. Elsevier Inc., 228(23), pp. 8779–8806. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2009.08.027.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2009.08.027 [Google Scholar]
  4. Luporini, F. et al.
    (2018) ‘Architecture and performance of devito, a system for automated stencil computation’, CoRR, abs/1807.0, pp. 1–27.
  5. Moczo, P., Kristek, J. and Halada, L.
    (2000) ‘3D Fourth-Order Staggered-Grid Finite-Difference Schemes: Stability and Grid Dispersion’, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 90(3), pp. 587–603.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Tam, C. K. W. and Webb, J. C.
    (1993) ‘Dispersion-relation-preserving finite difference schemes for computational acoustics’, Journal of Computational Physics, 107(1), pp. 262–281.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Virieux, J.
    (1984) ‘SH-wave propagation in heterogeneous media; velocity-stress finite-difference method’, Geophysics, 49(11), pp. 1933–1957.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (1986) ‘P-SV wave propogation in heterogeneous media: Velocity-stress finite-difference method’, Geophysics, 51(4), pp. 889–901.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Whitham, G. B.
    (1974) Linear and nonlinear waves.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900660
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900660
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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