Accepted 1989 April 17, Received 1989 April 17; in original form 1987 November 2
SUMMARY
A new technique for computing differential seismograms for crustal and upper
469
470
G . E. Randall
d = W(I - plR~Np'R)-'p'T~Ni
(3)
-I
N-1
(4)
471
472
G . E. Randall
1.o-
0.5 0.0
-0.5
- 1 .o-
L
I
SP\
S\
I
I
20
I
I
60
40
1
1
80
Time (sec)
Figure 2(a). Comparison of vertical component of synthetic receiver functions computed with Haskell's and Kennett's methods using the
velocity model shown in Fig. 2(c). For comparison, both synthetics have been normalized to a maximum amplitude of unity. Both traces have
been low-pass filtered with a zero phase (non-causal) filter with the corner frequency at 1 Hz. Time is the time since the arrival of the incident
wave at the base of the model. These traces are computed for a phase velocity of 7.95 km s - ' , which means P-waves are evanescent in the
fourth layer (from 40 to 60 km) and SPr,,P is post-critically reflected from the Moho. The Sp phase shown is from the Moho.
-1.0
473
1 .o
0.5
Y
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
a
1 .o
0.5
-0
N
-0.5
-1.0
20
60
40
Time (sec)
80
Figure 2(b). The same comparison as in Fig. 2(a), with a phase velocity of 8.15 km
which means that P-waves can propagate through the
fourth layer. Both this figure and Fig. 2(a) show minor amounts of time domain wraparound caused by frequency domain aliasing. This can be
cured by taking a longer time window or using complex frequency to attenuate unwanted later arrivals.
s
DI.LPLT$N
+D ~ . L ~ L R $ N ~ L R ~ L ~ L T G . N
(9)
where D1*N
is the synthetic receiver function for the total N
layer model. A schematic diagram of the direct arrival and a
single reverberation is shown in Fig. 4.
The first term from the expansion representing the direct
arrival, D'sLPLT$N,is simply understood from right to left
as the net upward transmission from the base of the N layer
model up to the base of layer L , followed by propagation
through layer L , and finally transformation into free surface
displacements by the receiver function for the region from
the free surface down to the top of layer L. The first
reverberation within layer L is represented by
D',LPLR$NP',RhLPLT~,N,
the second term from the
expansion. Reading from right to left again, term by term,
this is: the net upward transmission from the base of the N
layer model up to the base of layer L , followed by
propagation delay through layer L , reflection from the
'
3 EFFICIENT COMPUTATION OF
DIFFERENTIAL SEISMOGRAMS
Differential seismograms can be easily computed by
carefully considering what parts of the indirect computation
are changed by the perturbation of parameters of the layer
of interest. Then, using the results previously computed by
the direct techniques for those parts of the computation left
unchanged by the perturbation of a single layer, the
seismogram for the perturbed model can be computed
without duplicating previous computations. The indirect
formulation is valid for any layer within the model, and the
computations for the two direct approaches can be modified
to save the intermediate results for every layer providing the
basis for the rapid computation of the indirect technique.
0.0
474
G. E. Randall
I
8-
6+
-
4 --
'
5-
&. 4c
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on October 11, 2015
Depth (km)
Figure 2(c). P- and S-wave velocities versus depth for the crust and upper mantle model used for demonstration purposes.
D1,L-I
/"'"
RD
N-1
as,,,[t, +)I
adz)
- {sSy,[t,4
.
1
I
+ 6 4 z ) l - ssy"[4
+)I)
(10)
W Z )
475
-kennett v 7.95
............. kennett vp 7.95
0.2
E
Q,
-s 0.0
.v)
-0.2
20
30
40
50
60
Time (sec)
Figure 5. Comparison of unperturbed and perturbed synthetics computed with Kennett's method, and comparison of the differential
seismograms computed with Haskell's method and Kennett's method. In the perturbed and differential seismograms, the variation of the
P-wave velocity in layer 4 of the velocity model (shown in Fig. 2c) is 0.5 per cent from 8.0 to 8.04 km s-'. All traces have been low-pass filtered
with a zero phase (non-causal) filter with the corner frequency at 1 Hz. The comparison of unperturbed and perturbed seismograms in 5(a) and
5(c) shows the effect of phase velocity. In 5(a) the phase velocity of 7.95 km s - ' means that P-waves are evanescent in layer 4, and minimal
energy tunnels up or down through layer 4 as a P-wave. The arrivals after about 45 s in 5(a) show amplitude changes, but minimal traveltime
change. In contrast, the phase velocity in 5(c) is 8.15 km-' s, and the later arrivals in 5(c) occur earlier because the slightly increased velocity in
layer 4 reduces the travel time for P-waves travelling through layer 4. The comparison of differential seismograms computed with Kennett's
and Haskell's methods are shown in 5(b) and 5(d) for phase velocities of 7.95 and 8.15 kms-', respectively. For the purposes of comparison,
all differential seismograms have been normalized. This demonstrates the equivalence of the two techniques.
(b)
1.o
-L
0.5
g 0.0
V
0
-
-n
2
_ -0.5
-
-9
c
c
-1.0
1.0
YI-
c3
D
W
.-
0.5
-0.5
- 1 .o-
Time (sec)
Comparison of Unperturbed .vs. Perturbed Synthetics
(C)
0.2
c-'
I
20
30
....
40
Time (sec)
Figure 5. (Conrinued)
50
60
E 0.0
Comparison of Kennett
(d)
JS.
477
1.o
0.5
Q)
0.0
.-0.5
a
-
-= -1.0
-L
-n
1.0
Lc-
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
20
30
40
Time (sec)
50
60
Figure 5. (Continued)
x
-
*-
478
G. E. Randall
4 DISCUSSION
This paper has described three techniques for computing
synthetic seismograms of the response of the lithosphere to
teleseismic waves. Each technique emphasizes reverberation
within different parts of the velocity model, and these
different viewpoints are used to exploit the intermediate
results of the first two techniques in a computationally
simple third technique. No single viewpoint for the
computation of the synthetic receiver functions is as
effective at minimizing the recomputation of results.
After the theory was developed, a computer program was
written to calculate differential seismograms, and the results
were verified by comparison with a brute force computation
using a Haskell-Thomson formulation. The dramatic speed
improvement motivated the incorporation of these algorithms into an existing inverse modelling code (Owens,
Zandt & Taylor 1984) that had been based on ray-theory
synthetics. The first results using the modified modelling
program have already been presented (Priestley , Zandt &
Randall 1988) for P-wave data.
The substantial reduction of computation time of
differential seismograms for the teleseismic modelling
presented here should serve as an incentive for other inverse
modelling studies such as refraction waveform modelling.
The multiple reformulation of the forward problem can
clearly reduce the computation time of differential
seismograms in complicated models involving many layers.
The analysis of intermediate storage discussed above should
apply to the refraction modelling case as well. A vectorized
algorithm (Phinney, Odom & Fryer 1987) would require
storage of intermediate results at every frequency, but the
interface matrices could be stored as frequency independent. For a synthetic with 1024 frequencies, the intermediate
storage would then be about 4 megabytes. A more thorough
analysis should be the topic of a paper specifically discussing
the linearization of the reflectivity problem.
CONCLUSIONS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research was supported at SUNY at Binghamton by
National Science Foundation grant NSF-EAR-8508125 and
in part by grant NSF-EAR4306562 for computational
facilities. Additional support was provided at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory through the Department of
Energy Contract W-7405-ENG-48.
I would like to acknowledge the careful review of the
work leading to this manuscript by Dr George Zandt and Dr
Steven R. Taylor. Dr Taylor pointed out the earlier work by
Fernandez. 1 would also like to acknowledge thoughtful
reviews of this manuscript by Charles Ammon, Dr Keith
Nakanishi, Dr Howard Patton, and Dr Norman Burkhard. I
would especially like to acknowledge the incisive comments
of an anonymous reviewer.
REFERENCES
Dunkin, J. W., 1965. Computation of modal solutions in layered,
elastic media at high frequencies, Bull. seism. SOC.A m . , 55,
335-358.
Fernandez, L. M., SJ., 1965. Spectrum of P Waves, p. 172, Saint
Louis University, St Louis, Missouri.
Frazer, L. N. & Gettrust, J. F., 1984. On a generalization of Filons
method and computation of oscillatory integrals of seismology,
Geophys. J. R. astr. SOC., 76, 461-481.
Haskell, N. A,, 1962. Crustal reflection of plane P and SV waves, 1.
geophys. Res., 67, 4751-4767.
Kennett, B. L. N., 1983. Seismic Wave Propagation in Stratified
Media, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kind, R., 1978. The reflectivity method for a buried source, J.
Geophys., 44,603-612.
Langston, C. A., 1977. The effect of planar dipping structure on
source and receiver responses for constant ray parameter, Bull.
seism. SOC.A m . , 67, 1029-1050.
Menke, W., 1984. Geophysical Data Analysis: Discrete Inversion
Theory, Academic Press, New York.
Owens, T . J., Zandt, G. & Taylor, S. R., 1984. Seismic evidence
for an ancient rift beneath the Cumberland Plateau, TN: a
detailed analysis of broadband teleseismic P-waveforms, J.
geophys. Res., 89, 7783-7795.
Phinney, R. A., Odom, R. I. & Fryer, G. J., 1987. Rapid
generation of synthetic seismograms in layered media by
vectorization of the algorithm, Bull. seism. SOC. A m . , 77,
2218-2226.
Priestley, K. F., Zandt, G. & Randall, G. E., 1988. Crustal
structure in Eastern Kazakh, U.S.S.R from teleseismic receiver
functions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 15, 613-616.
Shaw, P. R. & Orcutt, J. A., 1985. Waveform inversion of seismic
refraction data and applications to young Pacific crust,
Geophys. J. R . mtr. SOC.,82, 375-414.
Zandt, G. & Randall, G. E., 1985. Observation of shear-coupled P
Waves, Geophys. Res. Lett., 12, 565-568.
SUN 3/50, a modest 32-bit microprocessor based workstation with 4 megabytes of memory, and is easily contained
in memory without using virtual memory to dynamically
page the program. The SUN 3/50 had the optional floating
point coprocessor (MC68881). The synthetics (vertical and
radial), and differential seismograms (vertical and radial),
with respect to P-wave velocity in each of the layers were
computed for two models. In the first case the computations
were for a 27-layer velocity model using a sampling interval
of 0.025s (20Hz Nyquist), and 2048 time points. The
frequency domain conjugate symmetry for real time
functions is exploited to permit evaluation of the transforms
of the signals at 1025 frequency samples. This is a high
resolution example, and is excessively detailed for the
analysis of teleseismic data, demonstrating a loose upper
bound for computation time. The SUN 3/50 performed the
frequency domain computations in 1550 s and a SUN 4/280
performed the same computations in 170s. Both codes
required modest additional time for inverse Fourier
transforms and file i/o of the synthetic and differential
seismograms. A more typical computation, representing
parameters used for analysis of teleseismic SV waveforms,
with a velocity model of 18 layers using a Nyquist of 2 H z
and 512 time samples took 256 s on a SUN 3/50 and 28 s on
a SUN 4/280.
479
with the usual meaning for the superscripts. The matrix that
transforms P and SV amplitudes at the free surface into
physical displacements is
APPENDIX
W = ( wvp
~ R PwRS
wvs)
Introduction
rips.
R"")
1.
"=(RsP
T,=[ T g p TLs
and T u = [ T ; T
~F
TS,PTF '
TCp T E
.GPP
480
G. E. Randall
R;"
R;'=
(A81
c X"
m
= (I - X)-l
"=O
ec eB(lP ~ R ~ ~ P ~ R ; ~ ) - ~ P ~ T F . (A14)
=
ec PuBPBTEc+ ~ u B P B R ~ c P B R < B P B T ~ c
=
(A15)
481