Which Idea is Better for Achieving PML Boundary? #2508
-
@mloubout Hi, Currently, the absorbing boundary is not efficient, especially when aiming for elastic or 3D FWI and LSRTM, as it requires a significant amount of grid space for the absorbing area. Based on your tutorial, I would like to implement the PML boundary. While I find your method for achieving the absorbing boundary elegant, modifying the forward and adjoint formulas will be necessary for successfully implementing PML or HABC. I have two ideas, and I would appreciate your guidance on them. I want to ensure that the PML can be utilized conveniently if I need to change my formulas again (please correct me if I'm wrong).
I am open to any other suggestions or comments you may have. Thank you for your time and patience. Sincerely, |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 8 comments 1 reply
-
I would probably look at the first option. The PS: I'm in and out for a few weeks, so apologies for the short answers |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi, I’m trying to learn from your (example) and modify the related files so we can use the solver to achieve FWI and LSRTM. I believe the same methods can be extended to the elastic example as well. I have attached my files and would appreciate your feedback. I’m particularly thinking about improving the implementation of the PML. An efficient absorbing boundary is crucial, especially if we want to extend this to 3D or field data. Here’s what I’ve done so far and where I need help: Right now, the forward simulation works fine, but when I try to calculate the gradient, I get some errors. I think this might be related to the acquisition setup, but I’m not sure. If you have time to review my files or share your ideas, I would greatly appreciate it. If I’ve made any mistakes or there’s a better way to do this, please let me know. Thank you so much for your time and help! I will show my codes as follows. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Here are my codes for testing:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Here are the errors:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Here are codes in
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Here are codes in
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Here are codes in
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I am sorry for using such a not elegant way to show my codes, once again, thanks for your time and help. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
I would probably look at the first option. The
Model
is not really "propagation" related but more a plain representation of the subsurface irrespective of waves. The examples are more of a set of tutorial-ish propagators that can be used for research but you can use it as a skeleton for your own PDEs or go a separate ways if there is a design and interface that would fit your needs better.PS:
I'm in and out for a few weeks, so apologies for the short answers