Introduction to Geophysical Modelling and Inversion

Similar documents
3D modeling of the Quest Projects Geophysical Datasets. Nigel Phillips

Introduction to Geophysical Inversion

QUEST Project: 3D inversion modelling, integration, and visualization of airborne gravity, magnetic, and electromagnetic data, BC, Canada.

Inversion concepts: Introducing geophysical inversion

Regional 3D inversion modelling of airborne gravity, magnetic, and electromagnetic data, Central BC, Canada.

Three-dimensional inversion of borehole, time-domain, electromagnetic data for highly conductive ore-bodies.

3D Inversion of Time-Domain Electromagnetic Data for Ground Water Aquifers

Electromagnetic migration of marine CSEM data in areas with rough bathymetry Michael S. Zhdanov and Martin Čuma*, University of Utah

Airborne IP for Kimberlite

26257 Nonlinear Inverse Modeling of Magnetic Anomalies due to Thin Sheets and Cylinders Using Occam s Method

Data Acquisition. Chapter 2

Oasis montaj How-To Guide. VOXI Earth Modelling - Running an Inversion Using Gradient Weighting

GEOPHYS 242: Near Surface Geophysical Imaging. Class 8: Joint Geophysical Inversions Wed, April 20, 2011

Oasis montaj How-To Guide. VOXI Earth Modelling - Running an Inversion

2D Inversions of 3D Marine CSEM Data Hung-Wen Tseng*, Lucy MacGregor, and Rolf V. Ackermann, Rock Solid Images, Inc.

(x, y, z) m 2. (x, y, z) ...] T. m 2. m = [m 1. m 3. Φ = r T V 1 r + λ 1. m T Wm. m T L T Lm + λ 2. m T Hm + λ 3. t(x, y, z) = m 1

Unstructured grid modelling to create 3-D Earth models that unify geological and geophysical information

Stage terrain 3A Heissenstein. Electrical surveying

Incorporating FWI velocities in Simulated Annealing based acoustic impedance inversion

Robust 3D gravity gradient inversion by planting anomalous densities

EOSC 454 Lab #3. 3D Magnetics. Date: Feb 3, Due: Feb 10, 2009.

Dealing with uncertainty in AEM models (and learning to live with it)

Target 3D Geology Surfaces

3D inversion of marine CSEM data: A feasibility study from the Shtokman gas field in the Barents Sea

Stage terrain 3A Heissenstein. Electrical surveying

Efficient 3D Gravity and Magnetic Modeling

EMIGMA V9.x Premium Series April 8, 2015

Engineering and Environmental Geophysics with terratem

SUMMARY. method to synthetic datasets is discussed in the present paper.

Lithological and surface geometry joint inversions using multi-objective global optimization methods

Gravity Gradients in PreStack Depth Migration

Oasis montaj How-To Guide. VOXI Earth Modelling - Running an AGG Unconstrained Inversion

Issues During the Inversion of Crosshole Radar Data: Can We Have Confidence in the Outcome?

WinGLink. Geophysical interpretation software VERSION

Sparse wavelet expansions for seismic tomography: Methods and algorithms

Joint seismic traveltime and TEM inversion for near surface imaging Jide Nosakare Ogunbo*, Jie Zhang, GeoTomo LLC

We 2MIN 02 Data Density and Resolution Power in 3D DC Resistivity Surveys

M. Warner* (S-Cube), T. Nangoo (S-Cube), A. Umpleby (S-Cube), N. Shah (S-Cube), G. Yao (S-Cube)

Noise in FTG Data and its Comparison With Conventional Gravity Surveys

Oasis montaj Best Practice Guide. VOXI Earth Modelling - Creating Gradient Weighting Voxels

Tying well information and seismic data

Inversion after depth imaging

Adaptive spatial resampling as a Markov chain Monte Carlo method for uncertainty quantification in seismic reservoir characterization

Integral equation method for anisotropic inversion of towed streamer EM data: theory and application for the TWOP survey

D020 Statics in Magnetotellurics - Shift or Model?

Geophysics 224 B2. Gravity anomalies of some simple shapes. B2.1 Buried sphere

Total variation tomographic inversion via the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers

Temporal Integration Of Seismic Traveltime Tomography

Oasis montaj Best Practice Guide. VOXI Earth Modelling - Preparing Data for Inversion

Curvature. Definition of curvature in 2D and 3D

Mo 21P1 08 Comparison of Different Acquisition Patterns for 2D Tomographic Resistivity Surveys

A MATLAB-Based Numerical and GUI Implementation of Cross-Gradients Joint Inversion of Gravity and Magnetic Data

prismatic discretization of the digital elevation model, and their associated volume integration problems. Summary

SUMMARY. denoise the original data at each iteration. This can be

Improved image segmentation for tracking salt boundaries

Oasis montaj Best Practice Guide. VOXI Earth Modelling - Rules of Thumb for Voxel Element Sizes

Getting Started with montaj GridKnit

Application of wavelet theory to the analysis of gravity data. P. Hornby, F. Boschetti* and F. Horowitz, Division of Exploration and Mining, CSIRO,

Interpreting Data in IX1D v 3 A Tutorial

REPORT ON A 3D INDUCED POLARISATION SURVEY OVER THE HOMEEP AND SHIRLEY TRENDS, CONCORDIA DISTRICT, NORTHERN CAPE

Question: What are the origins of the forces of magnetism (how are they produced/ generated)?

Closing the Loop via Scenario Modeling in a Time-Lapse Study of an EOR Target in Oman

Tensor Based Approaches for LVA Field Inference

Model parametrization strategies for Newton-based acoustic full waveform

Potent can model multi-component data, such as down-hole Fx, Fy, Fz magnetic data, or tensor gravity data.

GG450 4/5/2010. Today s material comes from p and in the text book. Please read and understand all of this material!

Gravity Methods (VII) wrap up

High definition tomography brings velocities to light Summary Introduction Figure 1:

Seismic Time Processing. The Basis for Modern Seismic Exploration

Noise-thresholding sparse-spike inversion with global convergence: calibration and applications

Target Lithology Voxels

Timelapse ERT inversion approaches and their applications

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING OF IP ANOMALOUS EFFECT FROM BODIES OF ANY GEOMETRICAL SHAPE LOCATED IN RUGED RELIEF AREA

Effects of multi-scale velocity heterogeneities on wave-equation migration Yong Ma and Paul Sava, Center for Wave Phenomena, Colorado School of Mines

2010 SEG SEG Denver 2010 Annual Meeting

Geogiga Seismic Pro 8.3 Release Notes

The determination of the correct

Adaptive Waveform Inversion: Theory Mike Warner*, Imperial College London, and Lluís Guasch, Sub Salt Solutions Limited

Elastic full waveform Inversion for land walkaway VSP data

We Survey Design and Modeling Framework for Towed Multimeasurement Seismic Streamer Data

Stabilization of the Euler deconvolution algorithm by means of a two steps regularization approach

Main Menu. Well. is the data misfit vector, corresponding to residual moveout, well misties, etc. The L matrix operator contains the d / α

TRAVELTIME TOMOGRAPHY (CONT)

cv R z design. In this paper, we discuss three of these new methods developed in the last five years.

Experimental Evaluation of 3D Geoelectrical Resistivity Imaging using Orthogonal 2D Profiles

Introduction to seismic body waves Tomography

Geometric theory of inversion and seismic imaging II: INVERSION + DATUMING + STATIC + ENHANCEMENT. August Lau and Chuan Yin.

Geostatistics 2D GMS 7.0 TUTORIALS. 1 Introduction. 1.1 Contents

Improvements in time domain FWI and its applications Kwangjin Yoon*, Sang Suh, James Cai and Bin Wang, TGS

Application of MPS Simulation with Multiple Training Image (MultiTI-MPS) to the Red Dog Deposit

GOCAD Mining Suite 17 update1 - Release notes

Mitigating Uncertainties in Towed Streamer Acquisition and Imaging by Survey Planning

P257 Transform-domain Sparsity Regularization in Reconstruction of Channelized Facies

Combined Electrical and Magnetic Resistivity Tomography (ERT/MMR)

Tu A4 09 3D CSEM Inversion Of Data Affected by Infrastructure

Summary. Introduction

GRAV3D Version 3.0. A Program Library for Forward Modelling and Inversion of Gravity Data over 3D Structures.

MAPPING POISSON S RATIO OF UNCONSOLIDATED MATERIALS FROM A JOINT ANALYSIS OF SURFACE-WAVE AND REFRACTION EVENTS INTRODUCTION

Deconvolution with curvelet-domain sparsity Vishal Kumar, EOS-UBC and Felix J. Herrmann, EOS-UBC

Benefits of Integrating Rock Physics with Petrophysics

Transcription:

Introduction to Geophysical Modelling and Inversion James Reid GEOPHYSICAL INVERSION FOR MINERAL EXPLORERS ASEG-WA, SEPTEMBER 2014 @ 2014 Mira Geoscience Ltd.

Forward modelling vs. inversion Forward Modelling: Given a model m and predicting data d d=f(m) F is an operator representing the governing equations relating the model and data F Model Data

Inversion Geophysical inversion refers to the mathematical and statistical techniques for recovering information on subsurface physical properties (magnetic susceptibility, density, electrical conductivity etc) from observed geophysical data.

What is inversion? Inversion: Recording data d and predicting model m m=f -1 (d) Data Model F -1

What is inversion? Forward Modelling: Given a model and predicting data d=f(m) Inversion: Recording data and predicting model m=f -1 (d) Not Possible - Ill Conditioned F Data Model F -1

Iterative inversion Starting model and acquisition parameters Calculate model response using forward modelling algorithm Compare observed and model responses, and calculate Objective function Each cycle through the inversion process is called an iteration Objective function large Objective function small, or maximum no. of iterations exceeded Alter model parameters so as to reduce objective function Inversion process is complete: Output final model

How do inversions work? This chart summarizes the requirements for proceeding with inversion of geophysical data. Given: - Field observations - Error estimates - Ability to forward model - Prior knowledge Each box has important implications for successful inversion. Discretize the Earth Ability to do forward modelling calculations is assumed. Choose a suitable data misfit Design model norm Perform inversion Evaluate results Iterate Interpret preferred model(s)

Models Model Types Single Physical Property Value Parameterized object (susceptibility, length, depth, orientation) Physical property varies as a function of depth Plate in a free-space (vacuum) Plate in a half space Plate in a layered model (after: Inversion for Applied Geophysics)

Models Model Types 2D models Model is unchanging perpendicular to profile section Physical properties change in all 3 directions. Generalized structure 2.5D models Model objects have limited strike length Concatenated 1D models Geometry Model Geologic unit boundaries adjust location to create 3D shapes and bodies. (after: Inversion for Applied Geophysics)

Why invert data? Helps explain complex data sets e.g. DCIP, Gravity Gradiometry, AEM, ZTEM, DHEM Removes topography effects Explains the data with a model(s) of the earth: Provides a quantitative model that can be analysed What is the depth, geometry, volume, physical property of the model features? More easily relates to geology - easier for interpretation What geologic features can be determined in the model? Can QC the data, identify problematic data acquisition problems Helps separate the noise from the signal in the data estimates the noise levels estimates depth of penetration

Example: Target in presence of geological noise Data are sometimes difficult to interpret IP data Shallow anomalies represent chargeable boulders in till Subtle responses are important Inversion result is more easily interpretable in terms of geology Recovered chargeability

Know The Data In order for modelling to occur, all instrument system and survey acquisition parameters have to be known. In general, try to do as little as possible to the data to preserve the information Obviously erroneous data should be removed prior to inversion. This includes features/anomalies in the data which are not modelled by the forward modelling algorithm e.g., IP or SPM effects in EM data etc RUBBISH IN = RUBBISH OUT

Inverse Modelling Modelling Styles Parametric few unknowns e.g. TEM decay 15 Data db/dt t 1 t 2 s 1 s 2 1D Conductivity model 7 unknown model parameters t 3 s 3 (conductivity of each layer; thickness of upper three layers) time s 4

Inverse Modelling Modelling Styles Parametric few unknowns Generalized many unknowns e.g. TEM decay db/dt 15 Data time 1D Conductivity model 40 unknown model parameters 1D Mesh structure predefined but smaller than expected structure of geology. structure inferred from the resulting model

Inverse Modelling Modelling Styles Lithology based VP suite (Fullagar Geophysics) Geomodeller (Intrepid) Physical Property based UBC-GIF codes Geosoft Voxi VP suite

Inverse Modelling Physical Property Based Modelling Physical property values of many individual cells are adjusted. General structure is recovered e.g. Magnetic Data 3D susceptibility model (low value cells removed)

Inverse Modelling Physical Property Based Modelling Physical property values of many individual cells are adjusted. General structure is recovered. e.g. Magnetic Data 3D susceptibility model (low value cells removed) 10,000+ unknown model parameters 3D Mesh structure predefined but smaller than expected structure of geology. structure inferred from the resulting model RESULT IS A PHYSICAL PROPERTY MODEL CONTAINING STRUCTURE

Inverse Modelling Lithology Based Modelling Provide physical properties (single value or distribution) for each lithology and adjust the geometry to fit the data. RESULT IS A GEOLOGICAL MODEL Selected Spectrem EM Channels (Obs - blue, Calc - red) 10^6 10^5 10^4 10^6 10^5 10^4 1000 1000 100 100 Starting Model (courtesy Anglo American) 600 600 550 550 500 500 450 450 Inverted Model 600 600 550 550 500 500 450 450

Inverse Modelling Which Modelling Style to choose? Depends on the geophysical method, the survey design, and the exploration goal. Some examples might be: Is the goal to define the geometry/volume? Measure the physical properties well and choose a lithologic based inversion (e.g. VPmg) Is the goal to define a thickness of cover from a few TEM soundings? Use a parametric inversion Is the goal to define both physical properties and geometry? Use a generalized inversion (e.g. UBC) What geologic information is available that can be integrated into the modelling?

Acceptable models and non-uniqueness There are infinitely many models that can explain the observed data Why is this so? Because there are usually more unknowns (model parameters) than observed data points (underdetermined problem) Some physically-based nonuniqueness Real data contain noise

Acceptable models and non-uniqueness There are infinitely many models that can explain the observed data

How to chose one of infinitely many solutions? Narrow down the range of options using prior knowledge Geophysical prior knowledge: Values are positive, and/or within bounds Physical Properties: Estimates for host rock properties Point-location values from drill hole information Logical prior knowledge: Find a simple result - as featureless as possible. This sacrifices resolution but prevents over-interpreting the data. Geological prior knowledge: Character of the model (smooth, discontinuous) Some idea of scale length (or size) of the bodies Structural Constraints

Model norm The model norm is a measure of the (mathematical) size of a model The inversion process is an automated decision making scheme The model norm is a way of encoding prior information in a form suitable for mathematical optimisation we seek the smallest model The model norm is part of the solution to nonuniqueness Nonuniqueness is addressed by choosing the one model (from infinitely many) that minimizes the defined model norm

Model norms Smooth Minimum horizontal structure Minimum vertical structure Minimise difference between the model and some reference model

Data misfit Measure of DIFFERENCE

What is a good measure of misfit? If we assume errors follow a particular distribution then a measure of total misfit between predictions and field data can be defined d (m): Predictions can be considered OK when d (m) < tolerance We don t want to fit the data too closely or we are fitting noise Not all measures of Data Misfit are equal

What contributes to data noise? Natural and cultural noise sources Accuracy and precision in data measurements Data positioning errors Approximations made in forward modelling 1D 2D 3D Plates Anisotropy Discretization of topography

% Cu % Copper Measures of misfit Consider the problem of fitting a straight line to the data shown below: 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 Depth in drillhole (m) The residuals are the differences between the data points and the best-fit line at each depth They may be positive or negative 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 e 11 e 28 y = 0.0285x + 0.3333 0 10 20 30 40 50 Depth in drillhole (m)

Measures of misfit L1 and L2 norms 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0 2 4 6 8 10

Measures of misfit L1 and L2 norms 0.65 0.6 y = 0.0285x + 0.333 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0 2 4 6 8 10 Original data Misfit = sum of squares of residuals (L2 norm = least-squares)

Measures of misfit L1 and L2 norms 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0 2 4 6 8 10 Original data Misfit = sum of absolute values of residuals (L1 norm)

Measures of misfit L1 and L2 norms 0.65 0.6 y = 0.0285x + 0.333 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0 2 4 6 8 10 Add an outlying data point

Measures of misfit L1 and L2 norms 0.65 0.6 y = 0.0298x + 0.342 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0 2 4 6 8 10 One outlying data point Misfit = sum of squares of residuals (L2 norm = least-squares)

Measures of misfit L1 and L2 norms 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 L1 Less affected by outliers (noise) 0.3 0 2 4 6 8 10 One outlying data point Misfit = sum of absolute values of residuals (L1 norm)

Combining model norms and misfit A statement of the inverse problem is: Find the model which Minimises the model norm ( M ), and Produces an acceptably small data misfit ( D ) Mathematically, this becomes a single optimisation Minimise = D + b M (subject to d < tolerance) is the combined objective function b is the trade off parameter (regularisation parameter)

b is the regularization parameter d b Solve: (m) = d (m) + b m (m) b too large underfitting the data. Structural information lost. b too small overfitting the data. Noise becomes imaged as structure. b just right ( d N ) optimal fit. Best estimate of a model which adequately re-creates the observations. * d b 0 m Tikhonov curve

Inverse Modelling Non-Uniqueness: Solution (partial ) Provide explicit geological information Constraints Combine information from independent geophysical methods Joint or Cooperative Inversions e.g. Gravity with Magnetics, Airborne EM with CSAMT, etc.

Integrated Modelling: Constraints Sources of Data Geologic Mapping DH geological logs Interpreted cross-sections 3D geological models Physical property data per lithology Located physical property data measurements Some information is subjective and some information is objective. As with the geophysical data we would desire to quantify the uncertainty associated with this data as an input to the inversion.

Rock properties are the link between geology and geophysics

Shameless plug Mira Geoscience Rock Property Database System http://rpds.mirageoscience.com/ Free! 6 million measurements, including GSC database and published data

Rock Property Database System Organise, understand, preserve and provide access to physical property data

Common Earth Modelling Extending the model to include multiple properties, that honour multiple data sets, on a single model object. Goal: Obtain the most complete representation of the earth. Benefits: Improved resolution away from constraints Allows more precise exploration using quantitative 3D GIS analysis.

Common Earth Modelling: Constrained Inversion Modelling 2D Gravity Synthetic (Nick Williams)

Common Earth Modelling: Constrained Inversion Modelling 2D Gravity Synthetic + (Nick Williams)

Common Earth Modelling: Constrained Inversion Modelling 2D Gravity Synthetic + (Nick Williams)

Common Earth Modelling: Constrained Inversion Modelling 2D Gravity Synthetic + Surface constraints can result in dramatic improvements (Nick Williams)

Joint and cooperative inversion Inversion using more than one geophysical method Methods sensitive to same physical property (e.g., TEM and CSAMT) Methods sensitive to related properties (e.g., seismic and gravity) Joint inversion single objective function Cooperative inversion iterative/sequential approach These approaches require that we establish relationships between the physical properties each method is sensitive to

Appraisal How good is our model? Over-fitting vs under-fitting data Limits to the data Limits to the physics Depth of investigation Suite of models Point-spread functions Model resolution analysis Sensitivity analysis Extremal models Model Covariance Matrix Co-Kriging error

Summary and conclusion Inversion has the potential to greatly improve the geological interpretation of geophysical data High quality data is essential for the success of geophysical modelling More appropriate/efficient surveys can be designed Complex data sets can be understood (DH IP, 3D EM) Understanding physical property data is the key to successful inversion interpretation. Rock type Alteration Mineralization

Summary and conclusion Non uniqueness in inversion is dealt with by imposing constraints Provide the constraints or they will be provided for you Minimum structure or geological Interpretation of inversion requires understanding of which parts of the model are driven by constraints and which parts are driven by data. Requires inspection of multiple models Inspect observed and predicted data before accepting a model. Did the inversion fit the data anomalies you are interested in? Beware of over-fitting and under-fitting your data

Summary and conclusion Geologically constrained inversion will greatly improve your results Constraints can be factual or conceptual (hypothesis testing) Sparse or detailed From different sources Geological maps Outcrop samples Estimates of overburden depth Detailed drill data

Acknowledgements Nigel Phillips Dianne Mitchinson Scott Napier Shannon Frey Thomas Campagne - Mira Geoscience, Vancouver Ross Brodie - Geoscience Australia Ken Witherly - Condor Consulting Regis Neroni - FMGL Doug Oldenburg - UBC-GIF

Reference Inversion for Applied Geophysics http://www.eos.ubc.ca/research/ubcgif/iag/iag-outline.htm