Premium
A new algorithm for three‐dimensional joint inversion of body wave and surface wave data and its application to the Southern California plate boundary region
Author(s) -
Fang Hongjian,
Zhang Haijiang,
Yao Huajian,
Allam Amir,
Zigone Dimitri,
BenZion Yehuda,
Thurber Clifford,
van der Hilst Robert D.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of geophysical research: solid earth
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.983
H-Index - 232
eISSN - 2169-9356
pISSN - 2169-9313
DOI - 10.1002/2015jb012702
Subject(s) - inversion (geology) , rayleigh wave , surface wave , geology , p wave , geodesy , algorithm , wave propagation , waveform , wavenumber , seismology , geometry , optics , physics , mathematics , computer science , telecommunications , medicine , radar , cardiology , atrial fibrillation , tectonics
We introduce a new algorithm for joint inversion of body wave and surface wave data to get better 3‐D P wave ( V p ) and S wave ( V s ) velocity models by taking advantage of the complementary strengths of each data set. Our joint inversion algorithm uses a one‐step inversion of surface wave traveltime measurements at different periods for 3‐D V s and V p models without constructing the intermediate phase or group velocity maps. This allows a more straightforward modeling of surface wave traveltime data with the body wave arrival times. We take into consideration the sensitivity of surface wave data with respect to V p in addition to its large sensitivity to V s , which means both models are constrained by two different data types. The method is applied to determine 3‐D crustal V p and V s models using body wave and Rayleigh wave data in the Southern California plate boundary region, which has previously been studied with both double‐difference tomography method using body wave arrival times and ambient noise tomography method with Rayleigh and Love wave group velocity dispersion measurements. Our approach creates self‐consistent and unique models with no prominent gaps, with Rayleigh wave data resolving shallow and large‐scale features and body wave data constraining relatively deeper structures where their ray coverage is good. The velocity model from the joint inversion is consistent with local geological structures and produces better fits to observed seismic waveforms than the current Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC) model.