2004
DOI: 10.1190/1.1836814
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ridge‐regression algorithm for gravity inversion of fault structures with variable density

Abstract: We derive an analytical expression for gravity anomalies of an inclined fault with density contrast decreasing parabolically with depth. The effect of the regional background, particularly the interference from neighboring sources of a fault structure, is ascribed by a polynomial equation. We have developed an inversion technique employing the ridge‐regression iterative algorithm to infer the shape parameters of the fault structure, in addition to the effect of regional background. We demonstrate the validity … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
36
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have used 29 vertical prisms, each with equal widths of 2.0 × 10 3 m but with different strike lengths for sedimentary basin modelling. The constants of parabolic density functions used for the Godavari sub-basin are ρ 0 = −0.5×10 3 and α = 0.1518259× 10 3 Kg m −3 per 1000 m (Chakravarthi and Sundararajan, 2004). So with 71 iterations and 45 models, we achieve a good fit between observed and PSO-analysed gravity anomalies.…”
Section: Godavari Sub-basinmentioning
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We have used 29 vertical prisms, each with equal widths of 2.0 × 10 3 m but with different strike lengths for sedimentary basin modelling. The constants of parabolic density functions used for the Godavari sub-basin are ρ 0 = −0.5×10 3 and α = 0.1518259× 10 3 Kg m −3 per 1000 m (Chakravarthi and Sundararajan, 2004). So with 71 iterations and 45 models, we achieve a good fit between observed and PSO-analysed gravity anomalies.…”
Section: Godavari Sub-basinmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…Our paper presents the applicability and potentiality of PSO in gravity inverse problems. First, PSO is validated on synthetic gravity anomalies with and without noise, and the developed PSO-based algorithm is finally applied over two kinds of field gravity data taken from different geological terrains: (i) residual gravity anomaly over Gradiz Graben, western Anatolia (Sari and Salk, 2002), and (ii) residual gravity anomaly taken from Godavari sub-basin, India (Chakravarthi and Sundararajan, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where, G is the universal gravitational constant and du dv dw is the volume of an elementary mass, and DqðzÞ is the density contrast represented by the parabolic density function at a given depth, z = w, as described by CHAKRAVARTHI et al (2001) and CHAKRAVARTHI and SUNDARARAJAN (2004),…”
Section: Gravity Anomaly Of a 25-d Vertical Prism With Pdpmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The methods enlisted above appear to be efficient only when the observed gravity anomalies are free from regional gravity background. However, in practice the anomaly due to a single geological structure can rarely be isolated perfectly from the interference of neighboring sources (CHAKRAVARTHI and SUNDARARAJAN, 2004) and therefore the interpretation carried out with the aforesaid techniques are often unreliable. Also, it is well known that the density of sedimentary rocks varies with depth (PEIRCE and LIPKOV, 1988;FERGUSON et al, 1988;HINZE, 2003) and hence it is possible to simulate the variation of density by mathematical functions which ensures more reliable results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the other words, different geometrical distributions of the subsurface mass can yield the same gravity field at the surface [Skeel 1947]. One way to solve this ambiguity is to assign a suitable geometry to the anomalous mass with a known density followed by inversion of gravity anomalies [Chakravarthi and Sundararajan 2004]. Although simple models may not be geologically realistic, they are usually are sufficient to analyze sources of many isolated anomalies [Abdelrahman and El-Araby 1993].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%