Benchmarking geoacoustic inversion methods using range-dependent field data
Over the past decade, inversion methods have been developed and applied to acoustic field data to provide information about unknown ocean-bottom environments. An effective inversion must provide both an estimate of the bottom parameters and a measure of the uncertainty of the estimated values. This...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | IEEE journal of oceanic engineering 2004-01, Vol.29 (1), p.3-12 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Over the past decade, inversion methods have been developed and applied to acoustic field data to provide information about unknown ocean-bottom environments. An effective inversion must provide both an estimate of the bottom parameters and a measure of the uncertainty of the estimated values. This paper summarizes results from the Office of Naval Research (ONR)/Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) Geoacoustic Inversion Techniques Workshop, test cases 4 and 5. The workshop was held to benchmark present-day inversion methods for estimating geoacoustic profiles in shallow water. The format of the workshop was a blind test to estimate unknown geoacoustic profiles by inversion of measured acoustic transmission loss data in octave bands and reverberation envelopes. The data sets for test cases 4 and 5 were taken at two locations in shallow water, one in the East China Sea and the other along the southwest coast of Florida. The limitations of the data and the limits to the knowledge of the sites are discussed. In both cases, impulsive sources were used in conjunction with air-deployed sonobuoys. Since the measured data was incoherent, only methods consistent with total energy matching were applicable. Comparisons between the different inversion techniques presented at the workshop are discussed. For test cases 4 and 5, a precise metric was unavailable for comparison. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0364-9059 1558-1691 |
DOI: | 10.1109/JOE.2003.823319 |