New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion

Geophysical Journal International

Volumn 172, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 513-535

  Newman, Gregory A ^a   Commer, Michael ^a  

^a LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Inverse theory; Marine electromagnetics; Numerical solutions

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; DATA INVERSION; ELECTROMAGNETIC METHOD; FINITE DIFFERENCE METHOD; INVERSE PROBLEM; MODELING;

EID: 38349084654     PISSN: 0956540X     EISSN: 1365246X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03663.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Alumbaugh, D.L., Newman, G.A., Prevost, L. & Shadid, J.N., 1996. Three-dimensional wideband electromagnetic modeling on massively parallel computers, Radio Sci., 31, 1-24.
2. Carazzone, J.J., Burtz, K.E., Green, K.E. & Pavlov, D.A., 2005. Three-dimensional imaging of marine CSEM data, SEG Techn. Prg. Exp. Abstr. 24, 575-578.
3. Commer, M. & Newman, G.A., 2005. An accelerated time domain finite difference simulation scheme for three-dimensional transient electromagnetic modeling using geometric multigrid concepts, Radio Sci., 41, RS3007.
4. Commer, M., Helwig, S.L., Hördt, A., Scholl, C. & Tezkan, B., 2006. New results on the resistivity structure of Merapi Volcano (Indonesia), derived from three-dimensional restricted inversion of long-offset transient electromagnetic data, Geophys. J. Int., 167, 1172-1187.
5. Eidesmo, T., Ellingsrud, S., MacGregor, L.M., Constable, S., Sinha, M.C., Johansen, S., Kong, F.N. & Westerdahl, H., 2002. Sea Bed Logging (SBL), a new method for remote and direct identification of hydrocarbon filled layers in deepwater areas, First Break, 20, 144-152.
6. Ellingsrud, S., Sinha, M.C., Constable, S., MacGregor, L.M., Eidesmo, T. & Johansen, S., 2002. Remote sensing of hydrocarbon layers by seabed logging (SBL): Results from a cruise offshore Angola, Leading Edge, 21, 972-982.
7. Gray, D.I., 1987. Troll, in Geology of the Norwegian Oil and Gas Fields, pp. 389-401, ed. Spencer, A.M., Graham and Trotman, London.
8. Haber, E. & Oldenburg, D., Joint inversion: A structural approach, Inverse Problems, 13, 63-77.
9. Hoversten, G.M., Constable, S.C. & Morrison, H.F., 2000. Marine magnetotellurics for base-of-salt mapping: Gulf of Mexico field test at the Gemini structure, Geophysics, 65, 1476-1488.
10. Hoversten, G.M., Røsten, T., Hokstad, K., Alumbaugh, D.L., Horne, S. & Newman, G.A., 2006. Integration of multiple electromagnetic imaging and inversion techniques for prospect evaluation, SEG Techn. Prg. Exp. Abstr., 25, 719-723.
11. Hoversten, G.M., Newman, G.A., Geier, N. & Flanagan, G., 2006. 3D modeling of a deepwater EM exploration survey, Geophysics, 71, G239-G248.
12. Hu, J.J., Newman, G.A. & Tuminaro, R.S., 2003. An Algebraic multigrid method for Maxwell's equations in the frequency domain, Progress in Electromagnetics Research Symposium (PIERS), 13-16 October 2003, Honolulu, Hawaii, page 222.
13. Johansen, S.E., Amundsen, H.E. F., Røsten, T., Ellingsrud, S. & Eidesmo, T., 2005. Subsurface hydrocarbons detected by electromagnetic sounding, First Break, 23, 31-36.
14. MacGregor, L. & Sinha, M., 2000. Use of marine controlled-source electromagnetic sounding for sub-basalt exploration, Geophys. Prospect., 48, 1091-1106.
15. Moskow, S., Druskin, V., Habashy, T., Lee, P. & Davydychewa, S., 1999. A finite difference scheme for elliptic equations with rough coefficients using a cartesian grid nonconforming to interfaces, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 36, 442-464.
16. Newman, G.A. & Alumbaugh, D.L., 1997. Three-dimensional massively parallel electromagnetic inversion-I. Theory, Geophys. J. Int., 128, 345-354.
17. Newman, G.A. & Alumbaugh, D.L., 2000. Three-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion using non-linear conjugate gradients, Geophys. J. Int., 140, 410-424.
18. Newman, G.A. & Alumbaugh, D.L., 2002. Three-dimensional induction logging problems, Part 2: A finite-difference solution, Geophysics, 67, 484-491.
19. Newman, G.A. & Hoversten, G.M., 2000. Solution strategies for two- and three-dimensional electromagnetic inverse problems, Inverse Problems, 16, 1357-1375.
20. Newman, G.A. & Boggs, P.T., 2004. Solution accelerators for large-scale three-dimensional electromagnetic inverse problems, Inverse Problems, 20, 151-170.
21. Nocedal, J., 1995. Conjugate gradient methods and nonlinear optimization, in Proc. Conf. Linear and Nonlinear Conjugate Gradient-Related Methods, pp. 9-23, eds Adams, L. & Nazareth, J.L., SIAM, Philadelphia.
22. Pratt, R.G., 1999. Seismic waveform inversion in the frequency domain, Part 1: Theory and verification in a physical scale model, Geophysics, 64, 888-901.
23. Schlumberger, 1987. Log Interpretation Principles, Schlumberger Educational Services, Houston, Texas.
24. Weiss, C.J. & Constable, S., 2006. Mapping thin resistors and hydrocarbons with marine EM methods, Part II-modeling and analysis in 3D Geophysics, 71, G321-G332.
25. Yee, K.S., 1966. Numerical solution of initial boundary value problems involving Maxwell's equations in isotropic media, IEEE Trans. Ant. Prop., AP-14, 302-307.