Projection methods and applications for seismic nonlinear inverse problems with multiple constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Nonlinear inverse problems are often hampered by local minima because of missing low frequencies and far offsets in the data, lack of access to good starting models, noise, and modeling errors. A well-known approach to counter these deficiencies is to include prior information on the unknown model, which regularizes the inverse problem. Although conventional regularization methods have resulted in enormous progress in ill-posed (geophysical) inverse problems, challenges remain when the prior information consists of multiple pieces. To handle this situation, we have developed an optimization framework that allows us to add multiple pieces of prior information in the form of constraints. The proposed framework is more suitable for full-waveform inversion (FWI) because it offers assurances that multiple constraints are imposed uniquely at each iteration, irrespective of the order in which they are invoked. To project onto the intersection of multiple sets uniquely, we use Dykstra’s algorithm that does not rely on trade-off parameters. In that sense, our approach differs substantially from approaches, such as Tikhonov/penalty regularization and gradient filtering. None of these offer assurances, which makes them less suitable to FWI, where unrealistic intermediate results effectively derail the inversion. By working with intersections of sets, we avoid trade-off parameters and keep objective calculations separate from projections that are often much faster to compute than objectives/gradients in 3D. These features allow for easy integration into existing code bases. Working with constraints also allows for heuristics, where we built up the complexity of the model by a gradual relaxation of the constraints. This strategy helps to avoid convergence to local minima that represent unrealistic models. Using multiple constraints, we obtain better FWI results compared with a quadratic penalty method, whereas all definitions of the constraints are in terms of physical units and follow from the prior knowledge directly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".