Skip to main content

Gravity inversion of basement relief using imperialist competitive algorithm with hybrid techniques

Abstract

Classically, local deterministic optimization techniques have been employed to solve such nonlinear gravity inversion problem. Nevertheless, local search methods can also be easily implemented and demonstrate higher rates of convergence; but in highly nonlinear cases such as geophysical problems, they require a reliable initial model which should be adequately close to the true model. Recently, global optimization methods have shown promising results as an alternative to classical inversion methods. Each of the global optimization algorithms has unique benefits and faults; therefore, applying different combinations of them is one of the proposed solutions for overcoming their distinct limitations. In this research, the design and implementation of the hybrid method based on a combination of the imperialist competitive algorithm (ICA) and firefly algorithm (FA) as tools of two-dimensional nonlinear modeling of gravity data and as a substitute for the local optimization methods were investigated. Hybrid of ICA and FA algorithm (known as ICAFA) is a modified form of the ICA algorithm based on the firefly algorithm. This modification results in an increase in the exploratory capability of the algorithm and improvement of its convergence rate. This inversion technique was first successfully tested on a synthetic gravity anomaly originated from a simulated sedimentary basin model both with and without the presence of white Gaussian noise (WGN). At last, the method was applied to the Bouguer anomaly from a real gravity profile in Moghan sedimentary basin (Iran). The results of this modeling were compatible with previously published works which consisted of both seismic analysis and other gravity interpretations. In order to estimate the uncertainty of solutions, several inversion runs were also conducted independently and the results were in line with the final solution.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions. These data are protected by the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC).

References

  1. Afonso LD, Mariani VC, Dos Santos CL (2013) Modified imperialist competitive algorithm based on attraction and repulsion concepts for reliability-redundancy optimization. Expert Syst Appl 40(9):3794–3802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Al‐Chalabi M (1971) Some studies relating to nonuniqueness in gravity and magnetic inverse problems. Geophysics 36(5):835–855. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aliniya Z, Keyvanpour M (2018) Solving constrained optimization problems using the improved imperialist competitive algorithm and Deb’s technique. J Exp Theor Artif Intell 30(6):927–951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alvandi A, Hoseini AR (2014) Inversion of gravity data based artificial bee colony (BCO) algorithm: application to synthetic and real data. Int J Adv Earth Sci 3(2):73–80

    Google Scholar 

  5. Amini A (2009) Sequence stratigraphic analysis of the Oligo-Miocene siliciclastic reservoir in Moghan area, NW Iran.

  6. Ansari-Ardeh MA, Menhaj MB, Esmailian E, Zandhessami H (2017) EXPLICA: an explorative imperialist competitive algorithm based on the notion of explorers with an expansive retention policy. Appl Soft Comput 54:74–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Atashpaz-Gargari E, Lucas C (2007) Imperialist competitive algorithm: an algorithm for optimization inspired by imperialist competition. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 4661–4667

  8. Aydilek IB (2018) A hybrid firefly and particle swarm optimization algorithm for computationally expensive numerical problems. Appl Soft Comput 66:232–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Balkaya Ç, Ekinci YL, Göktürkler G, Turan S (2017) 3D non-linear inversion of magnetic anomalies caused by prismatic bodies using differential evolution algorithm. J Appl Geophys 136:372–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Barbosa VCF, Silva JBC (1994) Generalized compact gravity inversion. Geophysics 59(1) 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Barbosa VCF, Silva JB, Medeiros WE (1997) Gravity inversion of basement relief using approximate equality constraints on depths. Geophysics 62(6):1745–1757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Biswas A, Sharma SP (2020) Advances in Modeling and Interpretation in Near Surface Geophysics. Springer International Publishing, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Bohidar RN, Sullivan JP, Hermance JF (2001) Delineating depth to bedrock beneath shallow unconfined aquifers: a gravity transect across the Palmer river basin. Ground Water 39(5):729–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Boschetti F, Dentith M, List R (1997) Inversion of potential field data by genetic algorithms. Geophys Prospect 45(3):461–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bott MHP (1960) The use of rapid digital computing methods for direct gravity interpretation of sedimentary basins. Geophys J Int 3(1):63–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chakravarthi V, Sundararajan N (2007) 3D gravity inversion of basement relief—a depth-dependent density approach. Geophysics 72(2):I23–I32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chakravarthi V (1995) Gravity interpretation of nonoutcropping sedimentary basins in which the density contrast decreases parabolically with depth. Pure Appl Geophys 145(2):327–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00880274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen W, Li D, Liu YJ (2018) A novel hybrid ICA-FA algorithm for multi-period uncertain portfolio optimization model based on multiple criteria. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 27:1023–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Duan H, Xu C, Liu S, Shao S (2010) Template matching using chaotic imperialist competitive algorithm. Pattern Recogn Lett 31(13):1868–1875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ekinci YL, Balkaya Ç, Göktürkler G (2019) Parameter estimations from gravity and magnetic anomalies due to deep-seated faults: differential evolution versus particle swarm optimization. Turkish J Earth Sci 28(6):860–881

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ekinci YL, Balkaya Ç, Göktürkler G, Özyalın Ş (2021) Gravity data inversion for the basement relief delineation through global optimization: a case study from the Aegean Graben System, western Anatolia, Turkey. Geophys J Int 224(2):923–944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ekinci YL, Balkaya Ç, Göktürkler G, Turan S (2016) Model parameter estimations from residual gravity anomalies due to simple-shaped sources using Differential Evolution Algorithm. J Appl Geophys 129:133–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ekinci YL, Özyalın Ş, Sındırgı P, Balkaya Ç, Göktürkler G (2017) Amplitude inversion of the 2D analytic signal of magnetic anomalies through the differential evolution algorithm. J Geophys Eng 14(6):1492–1508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Fakhrerad M, Nejati Kalateh A, Ghomi S (2015) Underground contour (UGC) mapping using potential field, well log and comparing with seismic interpretation in Lavarestan area. J Min Environ 6(1):55–62

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fang Q, Nguyen H, Bui XN, Nguyen-Thoi T (2019) Prediction of blast-induced ground vibration in open-pit mines using a new technique based on imperialist competitive algorithm and M5Rules. Nat Resour Res 29(2):791–806

  26. Farahani SM, Abshouri AA, Nasiri B, Meybodi MR (2012) Some hybrid models to improve firefly algorithm performance. Int J Artif Intell 8(12):97–117

    Google Scholar 

  27. Feng X, Wang W, Yuan B (2018) 3D gravity inversion of basement relief for a rift basin based on combined multinorm and normalized vertical derivative of the total horizontal derivative techniques. Geophysics 83(5):G107–G118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Fernandez-Martinez J, Fernandez-Muniz MZ, Tompkins MJ (2012) on the topography of the cost functional in linear and nonlinear inverse problems. Geophysics 77(1):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fernández-Martínez JL, García-Gonzalo E, Naudet V (2010) Particle swarm optimization applied to solving and appraising the streaming-potential inverse problem. Geophysics 75(4):WA3–WA15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Fister I, Fister I Jr, Yang XS, Brest J (2013) A comprehensive review of firefly algorithms. Swarm Evol Comput 13:34–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Fotouhi M, (1973) A Comprehensive Review of Geology and Oil Possibilities in Moghan Area. NIOC, Geological Report, 348 pp

  32. Gavin H (2011) The Levenberg-Marquardt method for nonlinear least squares curve-fitting problems. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Duke University, pp 1-15

  33. Göktürkler G, Balkaya Ç (2012) Inversion of self-potential anomalies caused by simple-geometry bodies using global optimization algorithms. J Geophys Eng 9(5):498–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Jafarzadeh M, Harami RM, Friis H, Amini A, Mahboubi A, Lenaz D (2014) Provenance of the Oligocene-Miocene Zivah Formation, NW Iran, assessed using heavy mineral assemblage and detrital clinopyroxene and detrital apatite analyses. J Afr Earth Sc 89:56–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Jamasb A, Motavalli-Anbaran S (2016) Non-linear stochastic inversion of regional Bouguer anomalies by means of particle swarm optimization. Iran J Geophys 10(5):10–21

  36. Jamasb A, Motavalli-Anbaran SH, Zeyen H (2017) Non-linear stochastic inversion of gravity data via quantum behaved particle swarm optimization: application to Eurasia-Arabia collision zone (Zagros, Iran). Geophys Prospect 65:274–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Jamasb A, Motavalli-Anbaran SH, Ghasemi K (2019) A novel hybrid algorithm of particle swarm optimization and evolution strategies for geophysical non-linear inverse problems. Pure Appl Geophys 176(4):1601–1613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Joolaei A, Arab-Amiri A, Nejati A (2019) Gravity nonlinear inverse modeling of basement relief via imperial competition algorithm. Iran J Res Appl Geophys 6(2):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  39. Joolaei A, Arab-Amiri A, Nejati A, Ghomi S (2020) Depth Estimation of Sedimentary Basins Basement from gravity data via competitive swarm optimization. Iran J Pet Res, in Press. https://doi.org/10.22078/pr.2020.3843.2755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kaftan İ (2017) Interpretation of magnetic anomalies using a genetic algorithm. Acta Geophys 65(4):627–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kashani AR, Gandomi AH, Mousavi M (2016) Imperialistic competitive algorithm: a metaheuristic algorithm for locating the critical slip surface in 2-dimensional soil slopes. Geosci Front 7(1):83–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Last BJ, Kubik K (1983) Compact gravity inversion. Geophysics 48(6):713–721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Leao JW, Menezes PT, Beltrão JF, Silva JB (1996) Gravity inversion of basement relief constrained by the knowledge of depth at isolated points. Geophysics 61(6):1702–1714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Liu S, Hu X, Liu T, Xi Y, Cai J, Zhang H (2015) Ant colony optimization inversion of surface and borehole magnetic data under lithological constraints. J Appl Geophys 112:115–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Maheri MR, Talezadeh M (2018) An enhanced imperialist competitive algorithm for optimum design of skeletal structures. Swarm Evol Comput 40:24–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Montesinos FG, Arnoso J, Vieira R (2005) Using a genetic algorithm for 3-D inversion of gravity data in Fuerteventura (Canary Islands). Int J Earth Sci 94(2):301–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Mojica OF, Bassrei A, (2015) Application of the generalized simulated annealing algorithm to the solution of 2d gravity inversion of basement relief. In: 3rd Latin American Geosciences Student Conference.

  48. Mundim KC, Lemaire TJ, Bassrei A (1998) Optimization of non-linear gravity models through generalized simulated annealing. Phys A 252(3–4):405–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Nabighian MN, Ander ME, Grauch VJS, Hansen RO, LaFehr TR, Li Y, Pearson WC, Peirce JW, Phillips JD, Ruder ME (2005) Historical development of the gravity method in exploration. Geophysics 70(6):63ND–89ND. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2133785

  50. Nagihara S, Hall SA (2001) Three-dimensional gravity inversion using simulated annealing: constraints on the diapiric roots of allochthonous salt structures. Geophysics 66(5):1438–1449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Nejati A, Ebrahimzadeh AV, Shahin E, Motavalli AS, Ghomi S, Javan E (2010) 2-D Non-linear inverse modeling of moghan area using Levenberg-Marquardt’s method. J Geosci 19:13–20

    Google Scholar 

  52. Pal SK, Rai CS, Singh AP (2012) Comparative study of firefly algorithm and particle swarm optimization for noisy non-linear optimization problems. Int J Intell Syst Appl 4(10):50

    Google Scholar 

  53. Parker RL (1973) The rapid calculation of potential anomalies. Geophys J Int 31(4):447–455. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1973.tb06513.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Pallero JLG, Fernandez-Martinez JL, Bonvalot S, Fudym O (2015) Gravity inversion and uncertainty assessment of basement relief via Particle Swarm Optimization. J Appl Geophys 116:180–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Pallero JLG, Fernández-Martínez JL, Bonvalot S, Fudym O (2017) 3D gravity inversion and uncertainty assessment of basement relief via Particle Swarm Optimization. J Appl Geophys 139:338–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Rao DB (1990) Analysis of gravity anomalies of sedimentary basins by an asymmetrical trapezoidal model with quadratic density function. Geophysics 55:226–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Redoloza F, Li L (2020) A comparison of extremal optimization, differential evolution and particle swarm optimization methods for well placement design in groundwater management. Math Geosci 53:711–735

  58. Rezaie M, Moradzadeh A, Nejati A, Aghajani H (2017) Fast 3D focusing inversion of gravity data using reweighted regularized Lanczos bidiagonalization method. Pure Appl Geophys 174(1):359–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Roy L, Sen MK, Blankenship DD, Stoffa PL, Richter TG (2005) Inversion and uncertainty estimation of gravity data using simulated annealing: an application over Lake Vostok, East Antarctica. Geophysics 70(1):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Sadhu AK, Rakshit P, Konar A (2016) A modified imperialist competitive algorithm for multi-robot stick-carrying application. Robot Auton Syst 76:15–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Salehpoor IB, Molla-Alizadeh-Zavardehi S (2019) A constrained portfolio selection model at considering risk-adjusted measure by using hybrid meta-heuristic algorithms. Appl Soft Comput 75:233–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Schaefer DH (1983) Gravity survey of Dixie Valley, west-central Nevada. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 82–111.

  63. Sen MK, Stoffa PL (2013) Global optimization methods in geophysical inversion. Cambridge University Press

    Book  Google Scholar 

  64. Silva JBC, Costa DCL, Barbosa VCF (2006) Gravity inversion of basement relief and estimation of density contrast variation with depth. Geophysics 71(5):J51–J58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Silva JB, Oliveira AS, Barbosa VCF (2010) Gravity inversion of 2D basement relief using entropic regularization. Geophysics 75(3):I29–I35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Silva JB, Santos DF (2016) Efficient gravity inversion of basement relief using a versatile modeling algorithm. Geophysics 82(2):23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Talbi EG (2009) Metaheuristics: from design to implementation, vol 74. John Wiley and Sons, New Jersey

    Book  Google Scholar 

  68. Tavakoli M, Nejati KA (2015) Study of North West Sedimentary Basin of Iran by 3D Modeling of Gravity Data.

  69. Tikhonov AN, Arsenin VY (1977) Solutions of ill-posed problems. Winston & Sons

    Google Scholar 

  70. Vasiljević I, Ignjatović S, Durić D (2019) Simple 2D gravity–density inversion for the modeling of the basin basement: example from the Banat area, Serbia. Acta Geophys 67(6):1747–1758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. White JT, Connor CB, Connor L, Hasenaka T (2017) Efficient inversion and uncertainty quantification of a tephra fallout model. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 122(1):281–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Xu S, Wang Y, Lu P (2017) Improved imperialist competitive algorithm with mutation operator for continuous optimization problems. Neural Comput Appl 28(7):1667–1682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-2138-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Yang XS (2008) Nature-Inspired Metaheuristic Algorithms. Luniver Press, UK

    Google Scholar 

  74. Yang XS, (2009) Firefly algorithms for multimodal optimization. In: International symposium on stochastic algorithms, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 169–178

  75. Yao X, Liu Y, Lin G (1999) Evolutionary programming made faster. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(2):82–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Yuan S, Tian N, Chen Y, Liu H, Liu Z, (2008) Nonlinear geophysical inversion based on ACO with hybrid techniques. In: 2008 fourth international conference on natural computation, vol. 4. IEEE, pp 530–534

  77. Zhou X (2012) Gravity inversion of 2D bedrock topography for heterogeneous sedimentary basins based on line integral and maximum difference reduction methods. Geophys Prospect 61(1):220–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alireza Arab-Amiri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Communicated by Michal Malinowski (CO-EDITOR-IN-CHIEF)/Teresa Grabowska, Ph.D. (ASSOCIATE EDITOR).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Joolaei, A., Arab-Amiri, A. & Nejati, A. Gravity inversion of basement relief using imperialist competitive algorithm with hybrid techniques. Acta Geophys. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-021-00597-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Gravity inversion
  • Global optimization
  • Imperialist competitive algorithm
  • Firefly algorithm
  • Uncertainty