26 April 2002 Velocity estimation by inversion of Focusing operators: About resolution dependent parameterization and the use of the LSQR method Barbara.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Kriging.
Advertisements

Dimensionality Reduction PCA -- SVD
PCA + SVD.
3D Reconstruction – Factorization Method Seong-Wook Joo KG-VISA 3/10/2004.
Computer vision: models, learning and inference
Shape From Light Field meets Robust PCA
Aspects of Conditional Simulation and estimation of hydraulic conductivity in coastal aquifers" Luit Jan Slooten.
Iterative closest point algorithms
Some useful linear algebra. Linearly independent vectors span(V): span of vector space V is all linear combinations of vectors v i, i.e.
Motion Analysis (contd.) Slides are from RPI Registration Class.
Methods For Nonlinear Least-Square Problems
CPI International UV/Vis Limb Workshop Bremen, April Development of Generalized Limb Scattering Retrieval Algorithms Jerry Lumpe & Ed Cólon.
Specular-Ray Parameter Extraction and Stationary Phase Migration Jing Chen University of Utah.
I DENTIFICATION OF main flow structures for highly CHANNELED FLOW IN FRACTURED MEDIA by solving the inverse problem R. Le Goc (1)(2), J.-R. de Dreuzy (1)
Linear Algebra Jean Walrand EECS – U.C. Berkeley.
Epipolar geometry. (i)Correspondence geometry: Given an image point x in the first view, how does this constrain the position of the corresponding point.
Michel Cuer, Carole Duffet, Benjamin Ivorra and Bijan Mohammadi Université de Montpellier II, France. Quantifying uncertainties in seismic tomography SIAM.
Real-time Combined 2D+3D Active Appearance Models Jing Xiao, Simon Baker,Iain Matthew, and Takeo Kanade CVPR 2004 Presented by Pat Chan 23/11/2004.
TFIDF-space  An obvious way to combine TF-IDF: the coordinate of document in axis is given by  General form of consists of three parts: Local weight.
Ordinary least squares regression (OLS)
Jana van Greunen - 228a1 Analysis of Localization Algorithms for Sensor Networks Jana van Greunen.
Efficient Quantum State Tomography using the MERA in 1D critical system Presenter : Jong Yeon Lee (Undergraduate, Caltech)
Algorithm Evaluation and Error Analysis class 7 Multiple View Geometry Comp Marc Pollefeys.
Team 2: Final Report Uncertainty Quantification in Geophysical Inverse Problems.
AN ITERATIVE METHOD FOR MODEL PARAMETER IDENTIFICATION 4. DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION MODELS E.Dimitrova, Chr. Boyadjiev E.Dimitrova, Chr. Boyadjiev BULGARIAN.
GEO7600 Inverse Theory 09 Sep 2008 Inverse Theory: Goals are to (1) Solve for parameters from observational data; (2) Know something about the range of.
Making Models from Data A Basic Overview of Parameter Estimation and Inverse Theory or Four Centuries of Linear Algebra in 10 Equations Rick Aster Professor.
Computer Graphics Group Tobias Weyand Mesh-Based Inverse Kinematics Sumner et al 2005 presented by Tobias Weyand.
1 Hybrid methods for solving large-scale parameter estimation problems Carlos A. Quintero 1 Miguel Argáez 1 Hector Klie 2 Leticia Velázquez 1 Mary Wheeler.
EISCAT Radar Summer School 15th-26th August 2005 Kiruna
Mining Discriminative Components With Low-Rank and Sparsity Constraints for Face Recognition Qiang Zhang, Baoxin Li Computer Science and Engineering Arizona.
Linear(-ized) Inverse Problems
CSE554AlignmentSlide 1 CSE 554 Lecture 5: Alignment Fall 2011.
G(m)=d mathematical model d data m model G operator d=G(m true )+  = d true +  Forward problem: find d given m Inverse problem (discrete parameter estimation):
SVD: Singular Value Decomposition
Kernel adaptive filtering Lecture slides for EEL6502 Spring 2011 Sohan Seth.
Parameter estimation. 2D homography Given a set of (x i,x i ’), compute H (x i ’=Hx i ) 3D to 2D camera projection Given a set of (X i,x i ), compute.
CSE554AlignmentSlide 1 CSE 554 Lecture 8: Alignment Fall 2013.
Data Mining Course 0 Manifold learning Xin Yang. Data Mining Course 1 Outline Manifold and Manifold Learning Classical Dimensionality Reduction Semi-Supervised.
A Flexible New Technique for Camera Calibration Zhengyou Zhang Sung Huh CSPS 643 Individual Presentation 1 February 25,
Geology 5670/6670 Inverse Theory 20 Feb 2015 © A.R. Lowry 2015 Read for Mon 23 Feb: Menke Ch 9 ( ) Last time: Nonlinear Inversion Solution appraisal.
Chance Constrained Robust Energy Efficiency in Cognitive Radio Networks with Channel Uncertainty Yongjun Xu and Xiaohui Zhao College of Communication Engineering,
Geology 5670/6670 Inverse Theory 18 Mar 2015 © A.R. Lowry 2015 Last time: Review of Inverse Assignment 1; Constrained optimization for nonlinear problems.
Migration Velocity Analysis of Multi-source Data Xin Wang January 7,
Parameter estimation class 5 Multiple View Geometry CPSC 689 Slides modified from Marc Pollefeys’ Comp
Optimal Relay Placement for Indoor Sensor Networks Cuiyao Xue †, Yanmin Zhu †, Lei Ni †, Minglu Li †, Bo Li ‡ † Shanghai Jiao Tong University ‡ HK University.
Camera Calibration Course web page: vision.cis.udel.edu/cv March 24, 2003  Lecture 17.
TELESEISMIC BODY WAVE INVERSION Alexandra Moshou, Panayotis Papadimitriou and Konstantinos Makropoulos Department of Geophysics-Geothermics National and.
Geology 5670/6670 Inverse Theory 4 Feb 2015 © A.R. Lowry 2015 Read for Fri 6 Feb: Menke Ch 4 (69-88) Last time: The Generalized Inverse The Generalized.
Chapter 12: Data Analysis by linear least squares Overview: Formulate problem as an over-determined linear system of equations Solve the linear system.
Alexandra Moshou, Panayotis Papadimitriou and Kostas Makropoulos MOMENT TENSOR DETERMINATION USING A NEW WAVEFORM INVERSION TECHNIQUE Department of Geophysics.
CSE 554 Lecture 8: Alignment
Depth from disparity (x´,y´)=(x+D(x,y), y)
Lecture 8:Eigenfaces and Shared Features
You can check broken videos in this slide here :
Parameter estimation class 5
Epipolar geometry.
Structure from motion Input: Output: (Tomasi and Kanade)
Singular Value Decomposition
Statement of the Tomography Problem
Deghosting of towed streamer and OBC data
Some useful linear algebra
Where did we stop? The Bayes decision rule guarantees an optimal classification… … But it requires the knowledge of P(ci|x) (or p(x|ci) and P(ci)) We.
The FOCI method versus other wavefield extrapolation methods
Overview of Multisource and Multiscale Seismic Inversion
Haiyan Zhang and Arthur B. Weglein
Integrated high-resolution tomography
Back to equations of geometric transformations
Structure from motion Input: Output: (Tomasi and Kanade)
Image segmentation for velocity model construction and updating
Presentation transcript:

26 April 2002 Velocity estimation by inversion of Focusing operators: About resolution dependent parameterization and the use of the LSQR method Barbara Cox IMA Workshop: Inverse Problems and Quantification of Uncertainty

slide 2 26 April 2002 Outline Inversion of Focusing Operators Regularization of inversion Resolution dependent Parameterization Optimization by LSQR Synthetic example CFP method

slide 3 26 April 2002 Outline Inversion of Focusing Operators Regularization of inversion Resolution dependent Parameterization Optimization by LSQR Synthetic example

slide 4 26 April 2002 Inversion of Focusing Operators Data: one-way travel times Unknowns: slowness & exact focus point location Obtained by minimizing: Distance (km) Depth (km) Distance (km) Time (s) 1

slide 5 26 April 2002 Forward modeling by raytracing ( t i ) Optimization Fit? Y Focusing operators (data) NN Initial macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Final macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Inversion of Focusing Operators Distance Depth x p,z p s j=1 s j=2 s j=M

slide 6 26 April 2002 Forward modeling by raytracing ( t i ) Optimization Fit? Y Focusing operators (data) NN Initial macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Final macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Inversion of Focusing Operators Distance Depth s j=1 s j=2 s j=M x p,z p t i=1 t i=2 t i=N

slide 7 26 April 2002 Forward modeling by raytracing ( t i ) Optimization Fit? Y Focusing operators (data) NN Initial macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Final macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Inversion of Focusing Operators Solve iteratively by e.g. SVD: Assume linear relation :

slide 8 26 April 2002 Forward modeling by raytracing ( t i ) Optimization Fit? Y Focusing operators (data) NN Initial macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Final macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Inversion of Focusing Operators

slide 9 26 April 2002 Outline Inversion of Focusing Operators Regularization of inversion Resolution dependent Parameterization Optimization by LSQR Synthetic example

slide April 2002 Regularization Parameterization: Regularizing by coarser (global) parameterization Optimization: Regularizing by e.g. resolution matrix Tomographic inverse problems are generally mixed determined Can be faced by regularization:

slide April 2002 Regularization: parameterization Forward modeling by raytracing ( t i ) Optimization Fit? Y Focusing operators (data) NN Initial macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Final macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) v1v1 v2v2 v3v3 vmvm z1z1 zkzk z2z2 v1v1 v2v2 v3v3 v4v4 Local: Global:

slide April 2002 Regularization: optimization Forward modeling by raytracing ( t i ) Optimization Fit? Y Focusing operators (data) NN Initial macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Final macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Regularization:

slide April 2002 Regularization Parameterization: Regularizing by coarser (global) parameterization Optimization: Regularizing by e.g resolution matrix Constraints resultStill over-parameterized Combine: Parameterization dependent on resolution No constraint on result, No over-parameterization

slide April 2002 Outline Inversion of Focusing Operators Regularization of inversion Resolution dependent Parameterization Optimization by LSQR Synthetic example

slide April 2002 N Forward modeling by ray-tracing ( t i ) Optimization Fit? Y Focusing operators (data) Final macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) N Adjustment of parameterization Calculation of resolution Initial macro model ( s j & x p,z p ) Resolution dependent Parameterization

slide April 2002 Resolution dependent Parameterization Calculation of resolution 1 Resolution 0 Distance Depth Resolution in model Distance Depth Velocity model

slide April 2002 Resolution dependent Parameterization Distance Adjustment of parameterization dependent on resolution Depth Resolution in model Distance Depth Velocity model Add points Remove points Resolution Gridpoints 1M Resolution plot

slide April 2002 Consequently: No constraint on result No over-parameterization The available information within the data can be completely translated to the model Resolution dependent Parameterization

slide April 2002 However, Calculation of resolution or covariance requires explicit matrix inversion Explicit matrix inversion is not feasible: Optimization by iterative method: LSQR Paige & Saunders (1982) Calculate resolution during iterative optimization Zhang and McMechan (1995) Yao et al (1999) Berryman (2001) Resolution dependent Parameterization

slide April 2002 Outline Inversion of Focusing Operators Regularization of inversion Resolution dependent Parameterization Optimization by LSQR Synthetic example

slide April 2002 Optimization by LSQR LSQR method: Iterative SVD approximation: k iterations k basis-vectors SVDLSQR Singular Value diagonal matrix Bi-diagonal matrix If k = number of parameters then LSQR=SVD Maximum number of iterations (k) = number of parameters First k LSQR basis-vectors First k SVD eigen-vectors

slide April 2002 Optimization by LSQR SVD LSQR V T k=31 U k=3 1 B k=31 VTVT USA A

slide April 2002 Optimization by LSQR Largest (pseudo) singular values are obtained first SVDLSQR SV diagonal matrix Pseudo SV diagonal matrix Singular values: Bi-diagonal matrix can be converted to a pseudo singular value diagonal matrix If k = number of parameters then

slide April 2002 Optimization by LSQR LSQR V T k=31 U k=3 1 B k=31 A VTBVTB UBUB SBSB SVD of B Singular values:

slide April 2002 Optimization by LSQR SVDLSQR k=31 B k=12 SBSB S SVD of B Singular values:

slide April 2002 Optimization by LSQR SVDLSQR diag(S B )diag(S) k=12k=3k=6k=9k=15k=12k=18k=21k=24k=27k=31 Large pseudo- singular values are solved first Singular values:

slide April 2002 Calculation of resolution by LSQR SVDLSQR Calculation of resolution by means of model space matrix If k = nr of parameters (over-determined system)Calculation of covariance by means of space matrix and singular value matrix

slide April 2002 SVDLSQR R k=31k=12 C Calculation of resolution by LSQR RkRk CkCk

slide April 2002 SVDLSQRk=12k=31 Calculation of resolution by LSQR k=3k=6k=9k=12k=15k=18k=21k=24k=27k=31 diag(R k ) diag(C k ) diag(C) diag(R)

slide April 2002 Calculation of resolution by LSQR R C The way the covariance evolves during the iterations cannot be trusted, as some parameters are not solved by the current basis-vectors Final covariance is the real covariance of the system is an indication that all parameters ARE solved, but not how WELL they are solved The way the resolution evolves during the iterations is an indication how WELL the parameters are solved Maximum iterations (=SVD)Limited number of iterations

slide April 2002 LSQR Calculation of resolution by LSQR k=3 k=6k=9k=12k=15k=18k=21k=24k=27k=31 SVD diag(R k ) diag(C k ) diag(C) diag(R) Low resolution AND low covariance indicate points that are not solved yet Can be used to describe the quality of the solution quantitatively

slide April 2002 Optimization by LSQR The relative resolution can be used as a criterion for adjustment of parameterization The pseudo singular values can be used to evaluate how well the system is determined The comparison between resolution and covariance can be used to evaluate which parameters are described Use of LSQR for resolution dependent parameterization: Quantitative criteria Qualitative criterion REMARK: Singular value decomposition of covariance matrix (Delphine Sinoquet) can be placed on top of this method: not expensive anymore However, don’t use covariance but resolution matrix

slide April 2002 Outline Inversion of Focusing Operators Regularization of inversion Resolution dependent Parameterization Optimization by LSQR Synthetic example

slide April 2002 Synthetic Example Ideal model Distance (km) Depth (km) Initial model 0 2 Time (s) Focusing operators Distance (km) 016 Distance (km) 016 Modeled Foc. oper. Distance (km) Velocity (m/s) Velocity (m/s) 0 2 Time (s) 0 4 Depth (km)

slide April Distance Depth Velocity Resolution Resolution dependent parameterization

slide April 2002 Result Ideal model Distance (km) Depth (km) Data driven model Distance (km) Velocity (m/s) 0 4 Depth (km) Distance (km) Depth (km) Data driven model Velocity (m/s)

slide April 2002 Migration Distance (km) 016 Updated model Velocity (m/s) 0 4 Depth (km) Ideal model Postupdating

slide April 2002 Conclusions Resolution dependent parameterization: efficient, data dependent, minimal user interaction Resolution can be obtained in an efficient way in the LSQR algorithm Regularization of the inverse problem by means of resolution dependent parameterization The optimization can be evaluated by the LSQR algorithm, using the resolution, the ‘pseudo’ singular values and the comparison between resolution and covariance

slide April 2002 Acknowledgements I would like to thank: The people of the CWP project for their Delaunay and ray-tracing software, which formed a base for the developed algorithm The sponsors of the Delphi Imaging and Characterization consortium for their support