Articles | Volume 14, issue 11
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6681-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6681-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
02 Nov 2021
Development and technical paper |
| 02 Nov 2021
| 02 Nov 2021
Structural, petrophysical, and geological constraints in potential field inversion using the Tomofast-x v1.0 open-source code
Centre for Exploration Targeting (School of Earth Sciences), University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
Mineral Exploration Cooperative Research Centre, School of Earth Sciences, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
now at: GeoRessources, Université de Lorraine, CNRS, 54000, Nancy, France
Vitaliy Ogarko
Centre for Exploration Targeting (School of Earth Sciences), University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
Mineral Exploration Cooperative Research Centre, School of Earth Sciences, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
The International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, University of Western Australia, 7 Fairway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
Roland Martin
Laboratoire de Géosciences Environnement Toulouse GET, CNRS UMR 5563, Observatoire Midi-Pyrénées, Université Paul Sabatier, 14 avenue Edouard Belin, 31400, Toulouse, France
Mark Jessell
Centre for Exploration Targeting (School of Earth Sciences), University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
Mineral Exploration Cooperative Research Centre, School of Earth Sciences, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
Mark Lindsay
Centre for Exploration Targeting (School of Earth Sciences), University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
Mineral Exploration Cooperative Research Centre, School of Earth Sciences, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia
Related authors
Lawrence A. Bird, Vitaliy Ogarko, Laurent Ailleres, Lachlan Grose, Jeremie Giraud, Felicity S. McCormack, David E. Gwyther, Jason L. Roberts, Richard S. Jones, and Andrew N. Mackintosh
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-211, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-211, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The terrain of the seafloor has important controls on the access of warm water to below floating ice shelves around Antarctica. Here, we present an open-source method to infer what the seafloor looks like around the Antarctic continent, and within these ice shelf cavities, using measurements of the Earth’s gravitational field. We present an improved seafloor map for the Vincennes Bay region in East Antarctica and assess its impact on ice melt rates.
Mark Douglas Lindsay, Vitaliy Ogarko, Jeremie Giraud, and Mosayeb Khademi
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3754, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3754, 2025
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
Geophysical data is used to understand the Earth's structure. Geophysical inversion is an optimisation technique that constructs a model of the Earth using geophysical data. Inversion is complex and requires constraints to produce a plausible model. Overfitting is a disadvantageous effect that can affect techniques that rely on optimisation. A new feature in an inversion platform reduces overfitting by informing inversion of spatial uncertainty contained within the geophysical data.
Vitaliy Ogarko, Kim Frankcombe, Taige Liu, Jeremie Giraud, Roland Martin, and Mark Jessell
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2325–2345, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2325-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2325-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present a major release of the Tomofast-x open-source gravity and magnetic inversion code that is enhancing its performance and applicability for both industrial and academic studies. We focus on real-world mineral exploration scenarios, while offering flexibility for applications at regional scale or for crustal studies. The optimisation work described in this paper is fundamental to allowing more complete descriptions of the controls on magnetisation, including remanence.
Jérémie Giraud, Guillaume Caumon, Lachlan Grose, Vitaliy Ogarko, and Paul Cupillard
Solid Earth, 15, 63–89, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-15-63-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-15-63-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present and test an algorithm that integrates geological modelling into deterministic geophysical inversion. This is motivated by the need to model the Earth using all available data and to reconcile the different types of measurements. We introduce the methodology and test our algorithm using two idealised scenarios. Results suggest that the method we propose is effectively capable of improving the models recovered by geophysical inversion and may be applied in real-world scenarios.
Jérémie Giraud, Hoël Seillé, Mark D. Lindsay, Gerhard Visser, Vitaliy Ogarko, and Mark W. Jessell
Solid Earth, 14, 43–68, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-14-43-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-14-43-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We propose and apply a workflow to combine the modelling and interpretation of magnetic anomalies and resistivity anomalies to better image the basement. We test the method on a synthetic case study and apply it to real world data from the Cloncurry area (Queensland, Australia), which is prospective for economic minerals. Results suggest a new interpretation of the composition and structure towards to east of the profile that we modelled.
Guillaume Pirot, Ranee Joshi, Jérémie Giraud, Mark Douglas Lindsay, and Mark Walter Jessell
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4689–4708, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4689-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4689-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Results of a survey launched among practitioners in the mineral industry show that despite recognising the importance of uncertainty quantification it is not very well performed due to lack of data, time requirements, poor tracking of interpretations and relative complexity of uncertainty quantification. To alleviate the latter, we provide an open-source set of local and global indicators to measure geological uncertainty among an ensemble of geological models.
Richard Scalzo, Mark Lindsay, Mark Jessell, Guillaume Pirot, Jeremie Giraud, Edward Cripps, and Sally Cripps
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3641–3662, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3641-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3641-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper addresses numerical challenges in reasoning about geological models constrained by sensor data, especially models that describe the history of an area in terms of a sequence of events. Our method ensures that small changes in simulated geological features, such as the position of a boundary between two rock layers, do not result in unrealistically large changes to resulting sensor measurements, as occur presently using several popular modeling packages.
Mark Jessell, Jiateng Guo, Yunqiang Li, Mark Lindsay, Richard Scalzo, Jérémie Giraud, Guillaume Pirot, Ed Cripps, and Vitaliy Ogarko
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 381–392, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-381-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-381-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
To robustly train and test automated methods in the geosciences, we need to have access to large numbers of examples where we know
the answer. We present a suite of synthetic 3D geological models with their gravity and magnetic responses that allow researchers to test their methods on a whole range of geologically plausible models, thus overcoming one of the fundamental limitations of automation studies.
Mahtab Rashidifard, Jérémie Giraud, Mark Lindsay, Mark Jessell, and Vitaliy Ogarko
Solid Earth, 12, 2387–2406, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-2387-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-2387-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
One motivation for this study is to develop a workflow that enables the integration of geophysical datasets with different coverages that are quite common in exploration geophysics. We have utilized a level set approach to achieve this goal. The utilized technique parameterizes the subsurface in the same fashion as geological models. Our results indicate that the approach is capable of integrating information from seismic data in 2D to guide the 3D inversion results of the gravity data.
Vitaliy Ogarko and Mark Jessell
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1294, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1294, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a new method to reconstruct underground rock layers from drillhole data, using an advanced algorithm to ensure geologically realistic results. By combining data from multiple drillholes, our approach reduces uncertainty and improves accuracy. Tested on South Australian data, it successfully predicted stratigraphy and highlighted ways to enhance data quality. This innovation makes geological analysis more reliable, aiding exploration and resource management.
Lawrence A. Bird, Vitaliy Ogarko, Laurent Ailleres, Lachlan Grose, Jeremie Giraud, Felicity S. McCormack, David E. Gwyther, Jason L. Roberts, Richard S. Jones, and Andrew N. Mackintosh
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-211, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-211, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The terrain of the seafloor has important controls on the access of warm water to below floating ice shelves around Antarctica. Here, we present an open-source method to infer what the seafloor looks like around the Antarctic continent, and within these ice shelf cavities, using measurements of the Earth’s gravitational field. We present an improved seafloor map for the Vincennes Bay region in East Antarctica and assess its impact on ice melt rates.
Mark Douglas Lindsay, Vitaliy Ogarko, Jeremie Giraud, and Mosayeb Khademi
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3754, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3754, 2025
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
Geophysical data is used to understand the Earth's structure. Geophysical inversion is an optimisation technique that constructs a model of the Earth using geophysical data. Inversion is complex and requires constraints to produce a plausible model. Overfitting is a disadvantageous effect that can affect techniques that rely on optimisation. A new feature in an inversion platform reduces overfitting by informing inversion of spatial uncertainty contained within the geophysical data.
Léonard Moracchini, Guillaume Pirot, Kerry Bardot, Mark W. Jessell, and James L. McCallum
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-154, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-154, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
To facilitate the exploration of alternative hydrogeological scenarios, we propose to approximate costly physical simulations of contaminant transport by more affordable shortest distances computations. It enables to accept or reject scenarios within a predefined confidence interval. In particular, it can allow to estimate the probability of a fault acting as a preferential path or a barrier.
Vitaliy Ogarko, Kim Frankcombe, Taige Liu, Jeremie Giraud, Roland Martin, and Mark Jessell
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2325–2345, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2325-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2325-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present a major release of the Tomofast-x open-source gravity and magnetic inversion code that is enhancing its performance and applicability for both industrial and academic studies. We focus on real-world mineral exploration scenarios, while offering flexibility for applications at regional scale or for crustal studies. The optimisation work described in this paper is fundamental to allowing more complete descriptions of the controls on magnetisation, including remanence.
Jiateng Guo, Xuechuang Xu, Luyuan Wang, Xulei Wang, Lixin Wu, Mark Jessell, Vitaliy Ogarko, Zhibin Liu, and Yufei Zheng
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 957–973, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-957-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-957-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study proposes a semi-supervised learning algorithm using pseudo-labels for 3D geological modelling. We establish a 3D geological model using borehole data from a complex real urban local survey area in Shenyang and make an uncertainty analysis of this model. The method effectively expands the sample space, which is suitable for geomodelling and uncertainty analysis from boreholes. The modelling results perform well in terms of spatial morphology and geological semantics.
Jérémie Giraud, Guillaume Caumon, Lachlan Grose, Vitaliy Ogarko, and Paul Cupillard
Solid Earth, 15, 63–89, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-15-63-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-15-63-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present and test an algorithm that integrates geological modelling into deterministic geophysical inversion. This is motivated by the need to model the Earth using all available data and to reconcile the different types of measurements. We introduce the methodology and test our algorithm using two idealised scenarios. Results suggest that the method we propose is effectively capable of improving the models recovered by geophysical inversion and may be applied in real-world scenarios.
Jérémie Giraud, Hoël Seillé, Mark D. Lindsay, Gerhard Visser, Vitaliy Ogarko, and Mark W. Jessell
Solid Earth, 14, 43–68, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-14-43-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-14-43-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We propose and apply a workflow to combine the modelling and interpretation of magnetic anomalies and resistivity anomalies to better image the basement. We test the method on a synthetic case study and apply it to real world data from the Cloncurry area (Queensland, Australia), which is prospective for economic minerals. Results suggest a new interpretation of the composition and structure towards to east of the profile that we modelled.
Guillaume Pirot, Ranee Joshi, Jérémie Giraud, Mark Douglas Lindsay, and Mark Walter Jessell
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4689–4708, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4689-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4689-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Results of a survey launched among practitioners in the mineral industry show that despite recognising the importance of uncertainty quantification it is not very well performed due to lack of data, time requirements, poor tracking of interpretations and relative complexity of uncertainty quantification. To alleviate the latter, we provide an open-source set of local and global indicators to measure geological uncertainty among an ensemble of geological models.
Richard Scalzo, Mark Lindsay, Mark Jessell, Guillaume Pirot, Jeremie Giraud, Edward Cripps, and Sally Cripps
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3641–3662, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3641-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3641-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper addresses numerical challenges in reasoning about geological models constrained by sensor data, especially models that describe the history of an area in terms of a sequence of events. Our method ensures that small changes in simulated geological features, such as the position of a boundary between two rock layers, do not result in unrealistically large changes to resulting sensor measurements, as occur presently using several popular modeling packages.
Mark Jessell, Jiateng Guo, Yunqiang Li, Mark Lindsay, Richard Scalzo, Jérémie Giraud, Guillaume Pirot, Ed Cripps, and Vitaliy Ogarko
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 381–392, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-381-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-381-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
To robustly train and test automated methods in the geosciences, we need to have access to large numbers of examples where we know
the answer. We present a suite of synthetic 3D geological models with their gravity and magnetic responses that allow researchers to test their methods on a whole range of geologically plausible models, thus overcoming one of the fundamental limitations of automation studies.
Ranee Joshi, Kavitha Madaiah, Mark Jessell, Mark Lindsay, and Guillaume Pirot
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6711–6740, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6711-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6711-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We have developed a software that allows the user to extract and standardize drill hole information from legacy datasets and/or different drilling campaigns. It also provides functionality to upscale the lithological information. These functionalities were possible by developing thesauri to identify and group geological terminologies together.
Mahtab Rashidifard, Jérémie Giraud, Mark Lindsay, Mark Jessell, and Vitaliy Ogarko
Solid Earth, 12, 2387–2406, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-2387-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-2387-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
One motivation for this study is to develop a workflow that enables the integration of geophysical datasets with different coverages that are quite common in exploration geophysics. We have utilized a level set approach to achieve this goal. The utilized technique parameterizes the subsurface in the same fashion as geological models. Our results indicate that the approach is capable of integrating information from seismic data in 2D to guide the 3D inversion results of the gravity data.
Lachlan Grose, Laurent Ailleres, Gautier Laurent, Guillaume Caumon, Mark Jessell, and Robin Armit
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6197–6213, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6197-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6197-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Fault discontinuities in rock packages represent the plane where two blocks of rock have moved. They are challenging to incorporate into geological models because the geometry of the faulted rock units are defined by not only the location of the discontinuity but also the kinematics of the fault. In this paper, we outline a structural geology framework for incorporating faults into geological models by directly incorporating kinematics into the mathematical framework of the model.
Mark Jessell, Vitaliy Ogarko, Yohan de Rose, Mark Lindsay, Ranee Joshi, Agnieszka Piechocka, Lachlan Grose, Miguel de la Varga, Laurent Ailleres, and Guillaume Pirot
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5063–5092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5063-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5063-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We have developed software that allows the user to extract sufficient information from unmodified digital maps and associated datasets that we are able to use to automatically build 3D geological models. By automating the process we are able to remove human bias from the procedure, which makes the workflow reproducible.
Lachlan Grose, Laurent Ailleres, Gautier Laurent, and Mark Jessell
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3915–3937, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3915-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3915-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
LoopStructural is an open-source 3D geological modelling library with a model design allowing for multiple different algorithms to be used for comparison for the same geology. Geological structures are modelled using structural geology concepts and techniques, allowing for complex structures such as overprinted folds and faults to be modelled. In the paper, we demonstrate automatically generating a 3-D model from map2loop-processed geological survey data of the Flinders Ranges, South Australia.
Cited articles
Ailleres, L., Jessell, M., de Kemp, E., Caumon, G., Wellmann, F., Grose, L., Armit, R., Lindsay, M., Giraud, J., Brodaric, B., Harrison, M., and Courrioux, G.: Loop – Enabling 3D stochastic geological modelling, ASEG Ext. Abstr., 2019, 1–3, https://doi.org/10.1080/22020586.2019.12072955, 2019.
Belge, M., Kilmer, M. E., and Miller, E. L.: Efficient determination of multiple regularization parameters in a generalized L-curve framework, Inverse Probl., 18, 314, https://doi.org/10.1088/0266-5611/18/4/314, 2002.
Bertsekas, D. P.: Nonlinear programming, 3rd edn., Athena Scientific, Belmont, Massachussetts, USA, ISBN: 978-1-886529-05-2, 2016.
Bhattacharyya, B. K.: Magnetic anomalies due to prism-shaped bodies with arbitrary polarization, Geophysics, 29, 517–531, 1964.
Bhattacharyya, B. K.: A generalized multibody model for inversion of magnetic anomalies, Geophysics, 45, 255–270, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441081, 1980.
Bijani, R., Lelièvre, P. G., Ponte-Neto, C. F., and Farquharson, C. G.: Physical-property-, lithology- and surface-geometry-based joint inversion using Pareto Multi-Objective Global Optimization, Geophys. J. Int., 209, 730–748, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggx046, 2017.
Blakely, R. J.: Potential Theory in Gravity and Magnetic Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995.
Boyd, S.: Distributed Optimization and Statistical Learning via the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers, Found. Trends® Mach. Learn., 3, 1–122, https://doi.org/10.1561/2200000016, 2010.
Boyd, S., Parikh, N., Chu, E., Peleato, B., and Eckstein, J.: Distributedoptimization and statistical learning via the alternating direction methodof multipliers, Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning, 3, 1–122, https://doi.org/10.1561/2200000016, 2011.
Brown, V., Key, K., and Singh, S.: Seismically regularized controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysics, 77, E57–E65, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2011-0081.1, 2012.
Calcagno, P., Chilès, J. P., Courrioux, G., and Guillen, A.: Geological modelling from field data and geological knowledge, Part I. Modelling method coupling 3D potential-field interpolation and geological rules, Phys. Earth Planet. In., 171, 147–157, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2008.06.013, 2008.
Carter-McAuslan, A., Lelièvre, P. G., and Farquharson, C. G.: A study of fuzzy c -means coupling for joint inversion, using seismic tomography and gravity data test scenarios, Geophysics, 80, W1–W15, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0056.1, 2015.
Craven, P. and Wahba, G.: Smoothing noisy data with spline functions, Numer. Math., 31, 377–403, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01404567, 1978.
Čuma, M. and Zhdanov, M. S.: Massively parallel regularized 3D inversion of potential fields on CPUs and GPUs, Comput. Geosci., 62, 80–87, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2013.10.004, 2014.
Čuma, M., Wilson, G. A., and Zhdanov, M. S.: Large-scale 3D inversion of potential field data, Geophys. Prospect., 60, 1186–1199, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01052.x, 2012.
de la Varga, M., Schaaf, A., and Wellmann, F.: GemPy 1.0: open-source stochastic geological modeling and inversion, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1–32, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1-2019, 2019.
De Stefano, M., Golfré Andreasi, F., Re, S., Virgilio, M., and Snyder, F. F.: Multiple-domain, simultaneous joint inversion of geophysical data with application to subsalt imaging, Geophysics, 76, R69–R80, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3554652, 2011.
Deal, M. M. and Nolet, G.: Nullspace shuttles, Geophys. J. Int., 124, 372–380, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1996.tb07027.x, 1996.
Doetsch, J., Linde, N., Coscia, I., Greenhalgh, S. A., and Green, A. G.: Zonation for 3D aquifer characterization based on joint inversions of multimethod crosshole geophysical data, Geophysics, 75, G53–G64, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3496476, 2010.
Dykstra, R. L.: An Algorithm for Restricted Least Squares Regression, J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 78, 837–842, https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1983.10477029, 1983.
Eckhardt, E. A.: Partnership between geology and geophysics in prospecting for oil, Geophysics, 5, 209–214, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441804, 1940.
Farquharson, C. G. and Oldenburg, D. W.: A comparison of automatic techniques for estimating the regularization parameter in non-linear inverse problems, Geophys. J. Int., 156, 411–425, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02190.x, 2004.
Fichtner, A. and Zunino, A.: Hamiltonian Nullspace Shuttles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 644–651, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL080931, 2019.
Gallardo, L. A. and Meju, M. A.: Characterization of
heterogeneous near-surface materials by joint 2D inversion of dc
resistivity and seismic data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30,
1–4, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL017370, 2003.
Gallardo, L. A. and Meju, M. A.: Joint two-dimensional DC resistivity and seismic travel time inversion with cross-gradients constraints, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 109, B03311, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JB002716, 2004.
Gil, Y., David, C. H., Demir, I., Essawy, B. T., Fulweiler, R. W., Goodall, J. L., Karlstrom, L., Lee, H., Mills, H. J., Oh, J.-H., Pierce, S. A., Pope, A., Tzeng, M. W., Villamizar, S. R., and Yu, X.: Toward the Geoscience Paper of the Future: Best practices for documenting and sharing research from data to software to provenance, Earth Space Sci., 3, 388–415, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015EA000136, 2016.
Giraud, J., Jessell, M., Lindsay, M., Parkyuz-Charrier, E., and Martin, R.: Integrated geophysical joint inversion using petrophysical constraints and geological modelling, in: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2016, pp. 1597–1601, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Dallas, Texas, 2016.
Giraud, J., Pakyuz-Charrier, E., Jessell, M., Lindsay, M., Martin, R., and Ogarko, V.: Uncertainty reduction through geologically conditioned petrophysical constraints in joint inversion, Geophysics, 82, ID19–ID34, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0615.1, 2017.
Giraud, J., Pakyuz-Charrier, E., Ogarko, V., Jessell, M., Lindsay, M., and Martin, R.: Impact of uncertain geology in constrained geophysical inversion, ASEG Ext. Abstr., 2018, 1, https://doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2018abM1_2F, 2018.
Giraud, J., Lindsay, M., Ogarko, V., Jessell, M., Martin, R., and Pakyuz-Charrier, E.: Integration of geoscientific uncertainty into geophysical inversion by means of local gradient regularization, Solid Earth, 10, 193–210, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-10-193-2019, 2019a.
Giraud, J., Ogarko, V., Lindsay, M., Pakyuz-Charrier, E., Jessell, M., and Martin, R.: Sensitivity of constrained joint inversions to geological and petrophysical input data uncertainties with posterior geological analysis, Geophys. J. Int., 218, 666–688, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggz152, 2019b.
Giraud, J., Ogarko, V., Lindsay, M., Pakyuz-Charrier, E., Jessell, M., and Martin, R.: Sensitivity of constrained joint inversions to geological and petrophysical input data uncertainties with posterior geological analysis, Geophys. J. Int., 218, 666–688, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggz152, 2019c.
Giraud, J., Lindsay, M., Ogarko, V., Jessell, M., Martin, R., and Pakyuz-Charrier, E.: Integration of geoscientific uncertainty into geophysical inversion by means of local gradient regularization, Solid Earth, 10, 193–210, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-10-193-2019, 2019d.
Giraud, J., Lindsay, M., Jessell, M., and Ogarko, V.: Towards plausible lithological classification from geophysical inversion: honouring geological principles in subsurface imaging, Solid Earth, 11, 419–436, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-11-419-2020, 2020.
Guillen, A., Calcagno, P., Courrioux, G., Joly, A., and Ledru, P.: Geological modelling from field data and geological knowledge, Part II. Modelling validation using gravity and magnetic data inversion, Phys. Earth Planet. In., 171, 158–169, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2008.06.014, 2008.
Hammond, G. E. and Lichtner, P. C.: Field-scale model for
the natural attenuation of uranium at the Hanford 300 Area using
high-performance computing, Water Resour. Res., 46, W09527, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008819, 2010.
Hansen, P. C. and Johnston, P. R.: The L-Curve and its Use in the Numerical Treatment of Inverse Problems, in: Computational Inverse Problems in Electrocardiography, pp. 119–142, available at: https://www.sintef.no/globalassets/project/evitameeting/2005/lcurve.pdf (last access: 13 September 2021), 2001.
Hansen, P. C. and O'Leary, D. P.: The Use of the L-Curve in the Regularization of Discrete Ill-Posed Problems, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 14, 1487–1503, https://doi.org/10.1137/0914086, 1993.
Heincke, B., Jegen, M., Moorkamp, M., Hobbs, R. W., and Chen, J.: An adaptive coupling strategy for joint inversions that use petrophysical information as constraints, J. Appl. Geophys., 136, 279–297, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2016.10.028, 2017.
Hoerl, A. E. and Kennard, R. W.: Ridge Regression: Application to nonorthogonal problems, Technometrics, 12, 69–82, https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1970.10488634, 1970.
Jessell, M., Giraud, J., and Lindsay, M.: 3-D geological and petrophysical models with synthetic geophysics based on data from the Hamersley region (Western Australia), Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4431796, 2021a.
Jessell, M., Ogarko, V., de Rose, Y., Lindsay, M., Joshi, R., Piechocka, A., Grose, L., de la Varga, M., Ailleres, L., and Pirot, G.: Automated geological map deconstruction for 3D model construction using map2loop 1.0 and map2model 1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5063–5092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5063-2021, 2021b.
Kamm, J., Lundin, I. A., Bastani, M., Sadeghi, M., and Pedersen, L. B.: Joint inversion of gravity, magnetic, and petrophysical data – A case study from a gabbro intrusion in Boden, Sweden, Geophysics, 80, B131–B152, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0122.1, 2015.
Komatitsch, D. and Martin, R.: An unsplit convolutional
perfectly matched layer improved at grazing incidence for the
seismic wave equation, Geophysics, 72, SM155-SM167, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2757586, 2007.
Kostina, E., Saunders, M. A., and Schierle, I.:
Computation of Covariance Matrices for Constrainted Parameter
Estimation Problems using LSQR, Stanford Optim. Lab Rep.,
4026, 1–11, 2009.
Kumar, V., Grama, A., Gupta, A., and Karypis, G.: Introduction to Parallel Computing: Design and Analysis of Algorithms, Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 1994.
Lelièvre, P., Farquharson, C., and Hurich, C.: Joint inversion of seismic traveltimes and gravity data on unstructured grids with application to mineral exploration, Geophysics, 77, K1–K15, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2011-0154.1, 2012.
Lelièvre, P. G. and Farquharson, C. G.: Integrated Imaging for Mineral Exploration, in: Integrated Imaging of the Earth: Theory and Applications, American Geophysical Union, 137–166, 2016.
Li, X. and Chouteau, M.: Three Dimensional Modeling in All Space, Surv. Geophys., 19, 339–368, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006554408567, 1998.
Li, Y. and Oldenburg, D. W.: 3-{D} inversion of magnetic data, Geophysics, 61, 394–408, 1996.
Li, Y. and Oldenburg, D. W.: 3-D inversion of gravity data, Geophysics, 63, 109–119, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444302, 1998.
Lindsay, M. D., Aillères, L., Jessell, M. W., de Kemp, E. A., and Betts, P. G.: Locating and quantifying geological uncertainty in three-dimensional models: Analysis of the Gippsland Basin, southeastern Australia, Tectonophysics, 546–547, 10–27, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2012.04.007, 2012.
Lindsay, M. D., Perrouty, S., Jessell, M. W., and Aillères, L.: Making the link between geological and geophysical uncertainty: geodiversity in the Ashanti Greenstone Belt, Geophys. J. Int., 195, 903–922, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt311, 2013.
Martin, R., Komatitsch, D., Gedney, S. D., and Bruthiaux,
E.: A high-order time and space formulation of the unsplit perfectly
matched layer for the seismicwave equation using auxiliary
differential equations (ADE-PML), CMES-Comp. Model. Eng., 56, 17–42, https://doi.org/10.3970/cmes.2010.056.017, 2010.
Martin, R., Monteiller, V., Komatitsch, D., Perrouty, S., Jessell, M., Bonvalot, S., and Lindsay, M. D.: Gravity inversion using wavelet-based compression on parallel hybrid CPU/GPU systems: application to southwest Ghana, Geophys. J. Int., 195, 1594–1619, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt334, 2013.
Martin, R., Ogarko, V., Komatitsch, D., and Jessell, M.: Parallel three-dimensional electrical capacitance data imaging using a nonlinear inversion algorithm and Lp norm-based model, Measurement, 128, 428–445, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2018.05.099, 2018.
Martin, R., Bodet, L., Tournat, V., and Rejiba, F.: Seismic wave propagation in nonlinear viscoelastic media using the auxiliary differential equation method, Geophys. J. Int., 216, 453–469, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggy441, 2019.
Martin, R., Giraud, J., Ogarko, V., Chevrot, S., Beller, S., Gégout, P., and Jessell, M.: Three-dimensional gravity anomaly inversion in the Pyrenees using compressional seismic velocity model as structural similarity constraints, Geophys. J. Int., 225, 1063–1085, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa414, 2020.
McLachlan, G. and Peel, D.: Finite Mixture Models, Wiley
Ser. Prob. Stat., 419,
https://doi.org/10.1198/tech.2002.s651, 2000.
Meju, M. A. and Gallardo, L. A.: Structural Coupling Approaches in Integrated Geophysical Imaging, pp. 49–67, 2016.
Moorkamp, M., Heincke, B., Jegen, M., Hobbs, R. W., and
Roberts, A. W.: Joint Inversion in Hydrocarbon Exploration, in:
Integrated Imaging of the Earth: Theory and Applications,
pp. 167–189, 2016.
Muñoz, G. and Rath, V.: Beyond smooth inversion: the use of nullspace projection for the exploration of non-uniqueness in MT, Geophys. J. Int., 164, 301–311, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2005.02825.x, 2006.
Nettleton, L. L.: Geophysics, geology and oil finding, Geophysics, 14, 273–289, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1437535, 1949.
Ogarko, V., Giraud, J., Martin, R., and Jessell, M.: Disjoint interval bound constraints using the alternating direction method of multipliers for geologically constrained inversion: Application to gravity data, Geophysics, 86, G1–G11, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2019-0633.1, 2021a.
Ogarko, V., Giraud, J., and Martin, R.: Tomofast-x v1.0
source code, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4454220, 2021b.
Paasche, H. and Tronicke, J.: Cooperative inversion of 2D geophysical data sets: A zonal approach based on fuzzy c -means cluster analysis, Geophysics, 72, A35–A39, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2670341, 2007.
Paige, C. C. and Saunders, M. A.: LSQR: An Algorithm for Sparse Linear Equations and Sparse Least Squares, ACM T. Math. Software, 8, 43–71, https://doi.org/10.1145/355984.355989, 1982.
Pakyuz-Charrier, E., Lindsay, M., Ogarko, V., Giraud, J., and Jessell, M.: Monte Carlo simulation for uncertainty estimation on structural data in implicit 3-D geological modeling, a guide for disturbance distribution selection and parameterization, Solid Earth, 9, 385–402, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-9-385-2018, 2018.
Pakyuz-Charrier, E., Jessell, M., Giraud, J., Lindsay, M., and Ogarko, V.: Topological analysis in Monte Carlo simulation for uncertainty propagation, Solid Earth, 10, 1663–1684, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-10-1663-2019, 2019.
Parsekian, A. D., Singha, K., Minsley, B. J., Holbrook, W. S., and Slater, L.: Multiscale geophysical imaging of the critical zone, Rev. Geophys., 53, 1–26, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014RG000465, 2015.
Peng, R. D.: Reproducible Research in Computational Science, Science, 334, 1226–1227, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1213847, 2011.
Portniaguine, O. and Zhdanov, M. S.: 3-D magnetic inversion with data compression and image focusing, Geophysics, 67, 1532–1541, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1512749, 2002.
Rashidifard, M., Giraud, J., Ogarko, V., Jessell, M., and Lindsay, M.: Cooperative Inversion of Seismic and Gravity Data Using Weighted Structure-Based Constraints, in: NSG2020 3rd Conference on Geophysics for Mineral Exploration and Mining, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, online, pp. 1–5, 2020.
Ren, Z. and Kalscheuer, T.: Uncertainty and Resolution Analysis of 2D and 3D Inversion Models Computed from Geophysical Electromagnetic Data, Surv. Geophys., 41, 47–112, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-019-09567-3, 2019.
Rudin, L. I., Osher, S., and Fatemi, E.: Nonlinear total variation based noise removal algorithms, Physica D, 60, 259–268, https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(92)90242-F, 1992.
Santos, E. T. F. and Bassrei, A.: L- and Θ-curve approaches for the selection of regularization parameter in geophysical diffraction tomography, Comput. Geosci., 33, 618–629, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2006.08.013, 2007.
Scheidt, C., Li, L., and Caers, J.: Quantifying Uncertainty in Subsurface Systems, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 2018.
Sun, J. and Li, Y.: Geophysical inversion using
petrophysical constraints with application to lithology
differentiation, SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting, 4–9 November 2012,
2644–2648, 2011.
Sun, J. and Li, Y.: Multidomain petrophysically constrained inversion and geology differentiation using guided fuzzy c-means clustering, Geophysics, 80, ID1–ID18, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0049.1, 2015.
Sun, J. and Li, Y.: Joint inversion of multiple geophysical data using guided fuzzy c -means clustering, Geophysics, 81, ID37–ID57, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2015-0457.1, 2016.
Sun, J. and Li, Y.: Joint inversion of multiple geophysical and petrophysical data using generalized fuzzy clustering algorithms, Geophys. J. Int., 208, 1201–1216, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw442, 2017.
Sun, J., Li, Y., and Studies, M.: Joint inversion of multiple geophysical data: A petrophysical approach using guided fuzzy c-means clustering, SEG Las Vegas 2012 Annual Meeting, 18–23 September 2011, pp. 1–5, 2012.
Tarantola, A.: Inverse Problem Theory and Methods for Model Parameter Estimation, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 2005.
Tarantola, A. and Valette, B.: Inverse Problems = Quest for Information, J. Geophys., 50, 159–170, https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1011, 1982.
Tikhonov, A. N. and Arsenin, V. Y.: Solutions of Ill-Posed Problems, John Wiley, New York, 1977.
Tikhonov, A. N. and Arsenin, V. Y.: Solution of Ill-Posed Problems, Math. Comput., 32, 491, https://doi.org/10.2307/2006360, 1978.
Vasco, D. W.: Invariance, groups, and non-uniqueness: The discrete case, Geophys. J. Int., 168, 473–490, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.03161.x, 2007.
Wegener, A.: Die Entstehung der Kontinente und Ozeane, Geogr. J., 61, 304, https://doi.org/10.2307/1781265, 1923.
Wellmann, F. and Caumon, G.: 3-D Structural geological
models: Concepts, methods, and uncertainties, C. Schmelzback (Ed.), pp. 1–121, Elsevier, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2018.
Wiik, T., Nordskag, J. I., Dischler, E. Ø., and Nguyen, A. K.: Inversion of inline and broadside marine controlled-source electromagnetic data with constraints derived from seismic data, Geophys. Prospect., 63, 1371–1382, https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12294, 2015.
Yan, P., Kalscheuer, T., Hedin, P., and Garcia Juanatey, M. A.: Two-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion using reflection seismic data as constraints and application in the COSC project, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 3554–3563, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL072953, 2017.
Zhang, J. and Revil, A.: 2D joint inversion of geophysical data using petrophysical clustering and facies deformation, Geophysics, 80, M69–M88, 2015.
Zhdanov, M. S. and Lin, W.: Adaptive multinary inversion of gravity and gravity gradiometry data, Geophysics, 82, G101–G114, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0451.1, 2017.
Zhdanov, M. S., Gribenko, A., and Wilson, G.: Generalized joint inversion of multimodal geophysical data using Gramian constraints, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L09301, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051233, 2012.
Short summary
We review different techniques to model the Earth's subsurface from geophysical data (gravity field anomaly, magnetic field anomaly) using geological models and measurements of the rocks' properties. We show examples of application using idealised examples reproducing realistic features and provide theoretical details of the open-source algorithm we use.
We review different techniques to model the Earth's subsurface from geophysical data (gravity...
