Designing Solutions to Geophysical Inverse Problems by Changing Variables
Xuebin Zhao, Andrew Curtis, Klaus Mosegaard

TL;DR
This paper investigates how changing variable parametrizations in geophysical inverse problems can lead to inconsistent Bayesian and deterministic solutions, impacting the reliability of these methods.
Contribution
It demonstrates that different parametrizations can cause inconsistent probability densities and solutions, challenging current practices in Bayesian and deterministic inversion.
Findings
Parametrization changes lead to inconsistent conditional probabilities.
Bayesian posterior solutions can vary dramatically with parametrization.
Deterministic solutions are also affected by parametrization choices.
Abstract
Geoscientists often solve inverse problems to estimate values of parameters of interest given relevant data sets. Bayesian inference solves these problems by combining probability distributions that describe uncertainties in both observations and unknown parameters, and we require that the solution provides unbiased uncertainty estimates in order to inform risk-based decisions. It has been known for over a century that employing different, but equivalent parametrisations of the same information can yield conditional probabilities that are mathematically inconsistent, a property referred to as the BK-inconsistency. Recently this inconsistency was shown to invalidate the solutions to physical problems found using several well-established methods of Bayesian inference. In this study, we explore the extent to which this inconsistency affects solutions to common geophysical problems. We…
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.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
