A COMPARISON OF THE GAUSS-NEWTON AND QUASI-NEWTON METHODS IN RESISTIVITY IMAGING INVERSION

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Loke M.H.
dc.contributor.author Dahlin T.
dc.date.accessioned 2021-04-15T02:40:30Z
dc.date.available 2021-04-15T02:40:30Z
dc.date.issued 2002
dc.identifier https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=915786
dc.identifier.citation Journal of Applied Geophysics, 2002, 49, 3, 149-162
dc.identifier.issn 0926-9851
dc.identifier.uri https://repository.geologyscience.ru/handle/123456789/27858
dc.description.abstract The smoothness-constrained least-squares method is widely used for two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) inversion of apparent resistivity data sets. The Gauss-Newton method that recalculates the Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives for all iterations is commonly used to solve the least-squares equation. The quasi-Newton method has also been used to reduce the computer time. In this method, the Jacobian matrix for a homogeneous earth model is used for the first iteration, and the Jacobian matrices for subsequent iterations are estimated by an updating technique. Since the Gauss-Newton method uses the exact partial derivatives, it should require fewer iterations to converge. However, for many data sets, the quasi-Newton method can be significantly faster than the Gauss-Newton method. The effectiveness of a third method that is a combination of the Gauss-Newton and quasi-Newton methods is also examined. In this combined inversion method, the partial derivatives are directly recalculated for the first two or three iterations, and then estimated by a quasi-Newton updating technique for the later iterations.The three different inversion methods are tested with a number of synthetic and field data sets. In areas with moderate (less than 10:1) subsurface resistivity contrasts, the inversion models obtained by the three methods are similar. In areas with large resistivity contrasts, the Gauss-Newton method gives significantly more accurate results than the quasi-Newton method. However, even for large resistivity contrasts, the differences in the models obtained by the Gauss-Newton method and the combined inversion method are small. As the combined inversion method is faster than the Gauss-Newton method, it represents a satisfactory compromise between speed and accuracy for many data sets.
dc.subject QUASI-NEWTON
dc.subject GAUSS-NEWTON
dc.subject OPTIMISATION
dc.subject RESISTIVITY
dc.subject IMAGING
dc.subject 2D
dc.title A COMPARISON OF THE GAUSS-NEWTON AND QUASI-NEWTON METHODS IN RESISTIVITY IMAGING INVERSION
dc.type Статья


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • ELibrary
    Метаданные публикаций с сайта https://www.elibrary.ru

Show simple item record