1887

Abstract

Summary

This work addresses the nonlinear multiparameter seismic imaging problem, which is inherently high-dimensional, ill-posed and susceptible to interparameter trade-offs (crosstalk). To mitigate crosstalk and enhance reconstruction quality, we enforce structural similarity among target parameters by jointly penalizing their spatial gradients. Specifically, the inversion is formulated within a Bayesian framework, where gradient penalization is modeled using Laplace distributions, equivalent to an anisotropic total variation approach. Expressing further these Laplace priors in hierarchical form enables the derivation of efficient inversion algorithms. The hyperparameters introduced in the hierarchical models for each target parameter, which serve as weights on the spatial gradients, are constrained to be identical at every spatial location, thereby enforcing structural similarity among the parameters. By further employing a Variational Bayesian approach, we efficiently infer these hyperparameters jointly with the target parameters, resulting in robust estimation at a reduced computational cost. We also discuss the computational complexity of the approach and propose a more efficient implementation that can be well-suited for large-scale problems while maintaining comparable reconstruction quality. The proposed method will be then evaluated by reconstructing subsurface velocity and density in a seismic imaging problem, demonstrating its effectiveness in mitigating crosstalk compared to traditional inversion techniques.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.2025101583
2025-06-02
2026-02-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Jakobsen, M., Xiang, K. and van Dongen, K.W.A. [2023] Seismic and medical ultrasound imaging of velocity and density variations by nonlinear vectorial inverse scattering. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 153(5).
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Keating, S. and Innanen, KA. [2020] Parameter crosstalk and leakage between spatially separated unknowns in viscoelastic full-waveform inversion. GEOPHYSICS, 85(4), R397–R408.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Martin, G.S., Wiley, R. and Marfurt, K.J. [2006] Marmousi2: An elastic upgrade for Marmousi. The Leading Edge, 25(2), 156–166.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Pan, W., Geng, Y. and Innanen, K.A. [2018] Interparameter trade-off quantification and reduction in isotropic-elastic full-waveform inversion: synthetic experiments and Hussar land data set application. Geophysical Journal International, 213(2), 1305–1333.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Prieux, V., Brossier, R., Operto, S. and Virieux, J. [2013] Multiparameter full waveform inversion of multicomponent ocean-bottom-cable data from the Valhall field. Part 2: imaging compressive-wave and shear-wave velocities. Geophysical Journal International, 194(3).
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Tarantola, A. [1984] Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation. GEOPHYSICS, 49(8), 1259–1266.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Tarantola, A. [1986] A strategy for nonlinear elastic inversion of seismic reflection data. GEOPHYSICS, 51(10), 1893–1903.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Urozayev, D., Ait-El-Fquih, B. and Peter, D.B. [2024] Sparse Variational Bayesian Inversion for Subsurface Seismic Imaging. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 62, 1–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Xiang, K., Jakobsen, M., Eikrem, K.S. and Naevdal, G. [2023] A matrix-free variant of the distorted Born iterative method for seismic full-waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 71(3), 431–142.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.2025101583
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.2025101583
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