TL;DR
This paper evaluates open-source 3D CSEM modelling codes, validating their accuracy and efficiency across various models, and highlights the importance of proper discretization for reliable results.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive comparison of open-source 3D CSEM codes, including validation procedures and insights into computational challenges and best practices.
Findings
Open-source codes produce comparable responses for complex models.
Mesh discretization significantly impacts accuracy.
Computational time is dominated by mesh setup, not simulation run time.
Abstract
Large-scale modelling of three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic (CSEM) surveys used to be feasible only for large companies and research consortia. This has changed over the last few years, and today there exists a selection of different open-source codes available to everyone. Using four different codes in the Python ecosystem, we perform simulations for increasingly complex models in a shallow marine setting. We first verify the computed fields with semi-analytical solutions for a simple layered model. Then we validate the responses of a more complex block model by comparing results obtained from each code. Finally we compare the responses of a real world model with results from the industry. On the one hand, these validations show that the open-source codes are able to compute comparable CSEM responses for challenging, large-scale models. On the other hand, they show…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
