Abstract:In near-surface investigations, the advent of massive seismic data has ushered in the application of deep learning (DL) techniques for surface wave inversion to attain the shear-wave velocity (Vs). While the efficiency of DL inversion surpasses that of classic physics-driven methods, its broader attributes remain underexplored. Our study delves into a comparative analysis of DL inversion versus physics-driven inversion, focusing on three key aspects: anti-noise ability, stability, and generalization.In numerical experiments, we employ the neighborhood algorithm (NA) (Wathelet, 2008) as a representative of physics-driven inversion, and a convolutional neural network (CNN) constructed for near-surface investigations (Chen et al., 2022) as a representative of data-driven inversion. In addition to comparing the two methods, we also explore the characteristics of joint inversion using Rayleigh-wave dispersion curves (DCs) and Love-wave DCs in the three above aspects. To quantitatively evaluate inversion results, we calculate the root mean square error and relative error of both DCs and Vs. The assessment of anti-noise performance involves applying NA and CNN to DCs with varying noise levels. To gauge stability, we introduce errors in compressional-wave velocity (Vp) and density, examining their effects on inversion precision. Lastly, to assess generalization, we use NA and CNN to invert DCs whose Vs exceeds the range of the training dataset by different percentages.Our findings reveal that DL inversion has a higher anti-noise ability compared with NA. Both methods demonstrate high stability, with errors in Vp and density exerting a slight impact on inversion results, aligning with surface wave inversion characteristics. Compared with physics-driven inversion, generalization is a unique feature of data-driven inversion. The experimental results indicate that the CNN can predict Vs models that are not included in the training dataset although this ability is somewhat limited. Furthermore, like physics-driven inversion, joint inversion enhances all three examined aspects for data-driven inversion. This analysis of characteristics can guide the selection of inversion methods for surface wave applications in near-surface investigations. References:Wathelet M., "An improved neighborhood algorithm: parameter conditions and dynamic scaling," Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 35, no. 9, pp. 2008, doi: 10.1029/2008GL033256. Chen X., Xia J., Pang J., Zhou C., and Mi B., "Deep learning inversion of Rayleigh-wave dispersion curves with geological constraints for near-surface investigations," Geophysical Journal International, vol. 231, no. 1, pp. 1-14, 2022, doi: 10.1093/gji/ggac171.

Full waveform inversion based on deep learning and optimal nearly analytic discrete method

A Method for Inverting Shallow Sea Acoustic Parameters Based on the Backward Feedback Neural Network Model

Full waveform inversion based on deep learning and the phase-preserving symplectic partitioned Runge-Kutta method

A theory-guided deep-learning formulation and optimization of seismic waveform inversion

Full Waveform Inversion Based on Time-Integral-damping Wavefield

Three-dimensional Frequency-Domain Full Waveform Inversion Based on the Nearly-Analytic Discrete Method

Reparameterized full-waveform inversion using deep neural networks

A Physics-Based Neural-Network Way To Perform Seismic Full Waveform Inversion

Full-waveform inversion with adversarial losses via deep learning

Integrating Deep Neural Networks with Full-waveform Inversion: Reparametrization, Regularization, and Uncertainty Quantification

Multimodal surface wave inversion with automatic differentiation

Elastic full-waveform inversion using tools of neural networks

InversionNet: A Real-Time and Accurate Full Waveform Inversion with CNNs and continuous CRFs

An Unsupervised Deep Learning Approach for the Wave Equation Inverse Problem

Inversion of Low- to Medium-Frequency Velocities and Densities from AVO Data Using Invertible Neural Networks

Comparison of Data-Driven and Physics-Driven Surface Wave Inversion

Implicit Full Waveform Inversion with Deep Neural Representation

Full waveform inversion with nonlocal similarity and model-derivative domain adaptive sparsity-promoting regularization

Automatic Differentiation-based Full Waveform Inversion with Flexible Workflows

Magnetotelluric Deep Learning Forward Modeling and Its Application in Inversion

Deep-learning seismic full-waveform inversion for realistic structural models