Articles | Volume 14, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3899-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3899-2021
Development and technical paper
 | 
28 Jun 2021
Development and technical paper |  | 28 Jun 2021

Constraining stochastic 3-D structural geological models with topology information using approximate Bayesian computation in GemPy 2.1

Alexander Schaaf, Miguel de la Varga, Florian Wellmann, and Clare E. Bond

Related authors

Quantification of uncertainty in 3-D seismic interpretation: implications for deterministic and stochastic geomodeling and machine learning
Alexander Schaaf and Clare E. Bond
Solid Earth, 10, 1049–1061, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-10-1049-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/se-10-1049-2019, 2019
Short summary
GemPy 1.0: open-source stochastic geological modeling and inversion
Miguel de la Varga, Alexander Schaaf, and Florian Wellmann
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1–32, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1-2019, 2019
Short summary

Related subject area

Numerical methods
Explicit stochastic advection algorithms for the regional-scale particle-resolved atmospheric aerosol model WRF-PartMC (v1.0)
Jeffrey H. Curtis, Nicole Riemer, and Matthew West
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8399–8420, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8399-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8399-2024, 2024
Short summary
The Measurement Error Proxy System Model: MEPSM v0.2
Matt J. Fischer
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6745–6760, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6745-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6745-2024, 2024
Short summary
Numerical stabilization methods for level-set-based ice front migration
Gong Cheng, Mathieu Morlighem, and G. Hilmar Gudmundsson
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6227–6247, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6227-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6227-2024, 2024
Short summary
Modelling chemical advection during magma ascent
Hugo Dominguez, Nicolas Riel, and Pierre Lanari
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6105–6122, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6105-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6105-2024, 2024
Short summary
Consistent point data assimilation in Firedrake and Icepack
Reuben W. Nixon-Hill, Daniel Shapero, Colin J. Cotter, and David A. Ham
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5369–5386, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5369-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5369-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Baddeley, M. C., Curtis, A., and Wood, R.: An introduction to prior information derived from probabilistic judgements: elicitation of knowledge, cognitive bias and herding, Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 239, 15–27, 2004. a
Bardossy, G. and Fodor, J.: Evaluation of Uncertainties and Risks in Geology: New Mathematical Approaches for Their Handling, Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. a
Bistacchi, A., Massironi, M., Dal Piaz, G. V., Dal Piaz, G., Monopoli, B., Schiavo, A., and Toffolon, G.: 3D Fold and Fault Reconstruction with an Uncertainty Model: An Example from an Alpine Tunnel Case Study, Comput. Geosc., 34, 351–372, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2007.04.002, 2008. a
Bolstad, W. M.: Understanding Computational Bayesian Statistics, John Wiley & Sons, 2009. a, b
Bond, C., Gibbs, A., Shipton, Z., and Jones, S.: What Do You Think This Is? “Conceptual Uncertainty” in Geoscience Interpretation, GSA Today, 17, 4, https://doi.org/10.1130/GSAT01711A.1, 2007. a, b
Download
Short summary
Uncertainty is an inherent property of any model of the subsurface. We show how geological topology information – how different regions of rocks in the subsurface are connected – can be used to train uncertain geological models to reduce uncertainty. More widely, the method demonstrates the use of probabilistic machine learning (Bayesian inference) to train structural geological models on auxiliary geological knowledge that can be encoded in graph structures.