2013
DOI: 10.1093/gji/ggt027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A parallel finite-element method for three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic forward modelling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
49
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 136 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
0
49
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, the performance of several tested approximate inverse preconditioners with static and dynamic sparsity pattern strategies for the systems resulting from the FD discretization was unsatisfactory in some cases. However, for the formulation in potentials, the truncated approximate inverse (TAI) preconditioner from Puzyrev et al (2013) and its variants based on topological and geometric approaches for an a priori chosen sparsity pattern performed reliably. Hence, we use this preconditioner with the block methods in the FE code.…”
Section: Preconditioningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the performance of several tested approximate inverse preconditioners with static and dynamic sparsity pattern strategies for the systems resulting from the FD discretization was unsatisfactory in some cases. However, for the formulation in potentials, the truncated approximate inverse (TAI) preconditioner from Puzyrev et al (2013) and its variants based on topological and geometric approaches for an a priori chosen sparsity pattern performed reliably. Hence, we use this preconditioner with the block methods in the FE code.…”
Section: Preconditioningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Simulations for CSEM synthetic models are performed using the finite-element code by Puzyrev et al (2013). The use of completely unstructured tetrahedral meshes allows us to simulate complicated 3D reservoirs more accurately and with modest computational cost.…”
Section: Design Of the Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Direct matrix solvers for large geophysical 3D forward problems [33,28,30,26,24,14,19,8,35,2,15] can be computationally expensive, both in terms of memory and CPU time. A way to overcome this limitation is by reducing the dimensionality of the problem, namely from 3D modeling to a 2.5D [23], 2D [4] and/or 1D [20] approximations that are only suitable for particular geometries.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%