Abstract:Much work has been done in developing and applying inverse methods to aquifer simulation problems. A new direct inversion method was proposed by Irsa and Zhang (2012) which proved that boundary condition is not required for estimating parameters in small-scale aquifer problems. The scope of this paper is to investigate the applicability of this new method for large simulation problems and to incorporate uncertainty measures in the inversion outcomes. The problem considered is a two-dimensional inverse model (50×50 grid) of steady-state flow for a heterogeneous ground truth model (100 ×100 grid) with two hydrofacies types (Chambers et al. 2000). From the ground truth model, twenty wells were sampled for facies types, based on which experimental indicator histogram and directional variograms were computed. These parameters and models were used by Sequential Indicator Simulation (SIS) to generate 60 realizations of hydrofacies patterns, which were conditioned to the facies measurements at wells. These realizations were further smoothed with Simulated Annealing, before they were conditioned with the direct inversion method to the dynamic data, i.e., observed heads and groundwater fluxes sampled at the same well locations. A set of realizations of estimated conductivities, flow fields, and boundary conditions have been created, which center on the "true" solutions from solving the flow problem with the ground truth model. For conductivity estimation, the estimated K was accurate within ±10% of the true values; for boundary condition estimation, the accuracy was within ± 15% of the true values. The inversion system of equations was solved with LSQR (Paige and Saunders 1982) for which we have adopted a matrix scaling preprocessor which speeds up the convergence of the solver by 50 times. In summary, the inverse method was proven applicable for integrating static and dynamic data within a stochastic framework. For inverting large problems, however, careful scaling analysis is needed to improve the performance of the iterative solver. Below we present the true model, 3 of the SIS realizations, and the corresponding inverted models. Both the estimated conductivity distribution and the inverted hydraulic head boundary condition were compared to the true values.

Characterization of the Non-Gaussian Hydraulic Conductivity Field Via Deep Learning-Based Inversion of Hydraulic-Head and Self-Potential Data

Coupled Hydrogeophysical Inversion to Identify Non-Gaussian Hydraulic Conductivity Field by Jointly Assimilating Geochemical and Time-Lapse Geophysical Data

Improved methodology for deep aquifer characterization using hydrogeological, self-potential, and magnetotellurics data

Improved Characterization of DNAPL Source Zones Via Sequential Hydrogeophysical Inversion of Hydraulic‐Head, Self‐Potential and Partitioning Tracer Data

An Integrated Framework of Deep Learning and Entropy Theory for Enhanced High-Dimensional Permeability Field Identification in Heterogeneous Aquifers

Characterization of discrete fracture networks with deep-learning based hydrogeophysical inversion

Coupled Hydrogeophysical Inversion of DNAPL Source Zone Architecture and Permeability Field in a 3D Heterogeneous Sandbox by Assimilation Time-Lapse Cross-Borehole Electrical Resistivity Data Via Ensemble Kalman Filtering

Comparison of geostatistical and deep-learning inversion methods for DNAPL source zone architecture characterization

Hydraulic Conductivity Estimation Using Tomographic Ground Penetrating Radar Data Within a Sampling‐Based Bayesian Inversion Approach

Simultaneous identification of contaminant sources and hydraulic conductivity field by combining geostatistics method with self-organizing maps algorithm

Dynamic data integration and stochastic inversion of a two-dimensional confined aquifer

Potential of Hydraulic Tomography in Identifying Boundary Conditions of Groundwater Basins

An inverse approach integrating flowmeter and pumping test data for three-dimensional aquifer characterization

Stochastic Inversion of a Tomographic Pumping Test: Identifying Conductivity Horizontal Correlation and Longitudinal Macrodispersivity

Physical-based Stochastic Inversion Assessing Aquifer Parameter and Boundary Condition Uncertainty

Fast Inverse Estimation of Hydraulic Conductivity Field Based on a Deep Convolutional-Cycle Generative Adversarial Neural Network

Estimation of 3-D hydraulic conductivity fields from fictive grain-size distributions derived from 3-D geological modeling

Joint Hydrogeophysical Inversion: State Estimation for Seawater Intrusion Models in 3D

Characterization of DNAPL source zones in clay-sand media via joint inversion of DC resistivity, induced polarization and borehole data

Determination of hydraulic conductivity and its spatial variability in the Jianghan Plain using a multi-format, multi-method approach

Groundwater Flow Monitoring by Fusion Probability Tomography of Self-Potential Data