ARTICLE IN PRESS

Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239 www.elsevier.com/locate/cageo

Nonlinear inversion of potential-eld data using a hybrid-encoding genetic algorithm

Chao Chena, Jianghai Xiab,, Jiangping Liua, Guangding Fenga
b a Department of Geophysics, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, PR China Kansas Geological Survey, The University of Kansas, 1930 Constant Ave., Lawrence, KS 66047, USA

Received 23 November 2004; accepted 6 June 2005

Abstract Using a genetic algorithm to solve an inverse problem of complex nonlinear geophysical equations is advantageous because it does not require computer gradients of models or good initial models. The multi-point search of a genetic algorithm makes it easier to nd the globally optimal solution while avoiding falling into a local extremum. As is the case in other optimization approaches, the search efciency for a genetic algorithm is vital in nding desired solutions successfully in a multi-dimensional model space. A binary-encoding genetic algorithm is hardly ever used to resolve an optimization problem such as a simple geophysical inversion with only three unknowns. The encoding mechanism, genetic operators, and population size of the genetic algorithm greatly affect search processes in the evolution. It is clear that improved operators and proper population size promote the convergence. Nevertheless, not all genetic operations perform perfectly while searching under either a uniform binary or a decimal encoding system. With the binary encoding mechanism, the crossover scheme may produce more new individuals than with the decimal encoding. On the other hand, the mutation scheme in a decimal encoding system will create new genes larger in scope than those in the binary encoding. This paper discusses approaches of exploiting the search potential of genetic operations in the two encoding systems and presents an approach with a hybrid-encoding mechanism, multi-point crossover, and dynamic population size for geophysical inversion. We present a method that is based on the routine in which the mutation operation is conducted in the decimal code and multi-point crossover operation in the binary code. The mix-encoding algorithm is called the hybrid-encoding genetic algorithm (HEGA). HEGA provides better genes with a higher probability by a mutation operator and improves genetic algorithms in resolving complicated geophysical inverse problems. Another signicant result is that nal solution is determined by the average model derived from multiple trials instead of one computation due to the randomness in a genetic algorithm procedure. These advantages were demonstrated by synthetic and real-world examples of inversion of potential-eld data. r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Genetic algorithm; Hybrid-encoding genetic algorithm; Potential elds; Inversion

1. Introduction Many geophysical inverse problems are resolved using optimization techniques. Thinking of each trial solution as being a point in a ten-dimensional solution space, each coordinate is oat-valued and can be any value in

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 785 864 2057;

fax: +1 785 864 5317. E-mail address: jxia@kgs.ku.edu (J. Xia).

0098-3004/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2005.06.008

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239 231

its range. An objective function we are trying to optimize may be very complicated by multi-local extrema. The genetic algorithm, a new kind of global optimization algorithm often referred to as standard (or simple) genetic algorithm (SGA), was presented in the late 1960s and early 1970s by Holland (1975) and his students. The mechanism that has evolved to carry out this search for the evolution problem consists of two parts: the genetic process and the natural selection. This mechanism has been manifestly successful. Genetic algorithms emphasize the evolution of the population instead of an individual. Their performances are considered as a multi-point search or parallel search. Practical improvements of the genetic algorithm for resolving special optimization problems (Roth and Holliger, 1998; He and Fu, 1999) encourage geophysicists to attempt to solve complicated problems by genetic algorithms. The application of the principle to geophysical inversion problems and data processing has become more common since the beginning of 1990s (e.g., Berg, 1990, 1991; Boschetti et al., 1996; Farrell et al., 1996; Docherty et al., 1997; Ji et al., 2000; Curtis and Snieder, 1997; Mallick, 1996, 1999; Porsani and Ursin, 2000; Wilson et al., 1994). The speed of convergence to an optimal solution in such systems is extremely important because of the randomness of the mechanism. Encoding techniques play a critical role in the genetic evolution because they inuence searching for or converging to an optimal solution. The dynamic parameter encoding technique, to a certain extent, may make the search around the peak of an objective function without more trials (Schraudolph and Belew, 1992). The multi-point crossover is able to speed swapping more parts of parameters to regenerate new parameters (Davis, 1991). Hybrid-coded crossover (Wu and Lin, 2004) can greatly enhance the capability of the operation in searching for global solutions. However, for geophysical inversion problems with high dimension and wide value-ranges of parameters, these crossover techniques may be successful only under the condition that solutions have been embedded in original or present populations. In other words, the genes constructing the solution are present in the gene-cluster of the population. When initial parameters are far apart from the globe optimal solution, mutation will be crucial to convergence of genetic algorithms. A uniform encoding system, however, does not provide optimal searches for all genetic operations. Modications to mutation process become necessary. In this paper, we will discuss the variable encoding scheme of the genetic algorithm, in which genetic operations are alternatively applied in the binary code or decimal code. In this specic application the mutation operation is conducted in the decimal code and other operations in the binary code. We call this method a hybrid-encoding genetic algorithm (HEGA). Our work will demonstrate how the HEGA enhances

the ability of exploring optimal solutions of inverse problems of potential-eld data.

2. Genetic searching The operation of the SGA is based on a parameter encoded in the binary or decimal code. The binary encoding was rst used in the original genetic algorithm (Holland, 1975). These algorithms were more practical and easy to implement when some essential techniques were improved and the decimal encoding was introduced (Goldberg, 1989). Both encoding mechanisms are different in genetic searching capabilities (Zhang et al., 1997). Encoding is the basic phase of evolution algorithms on which the genetic operations depend. Following is a brief discussion about the search effectiveness in both encoding systems, which will demonstrate the necessity of improving encoding mechanism. Suppose an individual model x consists of m parameters that construct a string of genes (codes), and the initial population {x} is composed of n models (the size of population) that are different from each other. Using xit to denote the ith individual model of the tth generation in the procedure of evolution, we have xi0 axj0 ; iaj; i; j 2 1; 2; :::; n. xit (1)

is the In the decimal encoding system, in fact, vector of m dimensions, e.g., xit a1 ; a2 ; a3 ; . . . ; am [2 9 13y4]. We can also say that each individual model is constructed with m genes. Parameters in the binary code seem somewhat complex. The gene strings expressing the parameters are depicted by binary digits 0 and 1. If each parameter is represented in the binary code with the code-length of L, the individual model xit will be the vector of Lm dimensions and has a construction of Lm genes, e.g., xit a1 ; a2 ; a3 ; . . . ; an [0010 1001 1101 y 0100], if L 4. After dening the gene strings, the evolution of the population can be conducted in a designed procedure. The crucial operator in a genetic algorithm is crossover. The crossover operation is to construct new offspring models by combining model features copied from the parts of selected parent models. The operation under the binary encoding system supplies more opportunities for producing new strings than under the decimal encoding system. For the decimal encoding system, each couple has (m1) crossover positions. Because each model in the population has (n1) choices of partnership based on the previous assumption, the total possibilities to produce new models in the population through single-point crossover are given by T D m 1n 1. (2)

If k couples in the generation are candidates for crossover, the total possibilities of producing new

ARTICLE IN PRESS
232 C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239

models for this generation are 2k TD. For the binary encoding system, the number of crossover positions increases from (m1) to (mL1). Thus the total opportunities to produce new individual models through single-point crossover would be T B Lm 1n 1. (3)

Because LX1, TB is more than or at least equal to that from the decimal encoding system, i.e., TBXTD. Basically, the crossover operation impels the algorithm to search in the model space and makes new sampling regions. It gets rid of the restriction of searching in previous sampling regions. This nonlinear, non-proximate search process creates a surprisingly efcient reconnaissance of a model space. The mutation was considered as the secondary operation in the genetic process and is a low-probability, randomizing process. The operation mutates a gene (code) of a chromosome in value. The mutation makes the population diversied. However, it is important to promote the evolution of population. Without mutation, no offspring model could ever acquire a value that was absent in the population. The mutation operation in the binary code creates limited opportunities to generate new models due to the disgurement of the encoding mechanism. If a parameter in the binary code with codelength of L goes through the mutation (single-point mutation), the numerical value of the parameter will change denitely within the dened range of the parameter. We expect that the variation would be helpful to improve the models in the population. This search, however, does not work every value in the denite range. For example, if a parameter with value of (1011)2 (11)10 goes through the mutation [(*)2 denotes a value in binary; (*)10 denotes a value in decimal], the candidate will probably be one of four new values (1010)2 (10)10, (1001)2 (9)10, (1111)2 (15)10, and (0011)2 (3)10. The other values, like (1110)2 (14)10 or (0110)2 (6)10, are disqualied in the election unless they are mutated two times or undergo at least a twopoint mutation simultaneously. The example shows that the accessible rate of the mutation operation is L/(2L1) in this case. It means that a search in the binary code by mutation is, in fact, limited to a certain extent. There are inaccessible ranges or blind-zones for the mutation in binary code. If a decimal number from one to a hundred is randomly selected, each candidate is of equivalent probability to be selected. The mutation in the decimal encoding system is the same process as renewing a parameter in its denite range. The regeneration is nonconstrained and works randomly. Therefore, the mutation in the decimal encoding system promotes the genetic process and provides a widespread range for new models.

The crossover operation in whatever encoding system creates no new genes. Generally, the crossover directly swaps parameters of parent models in the decimal code system but swaps code-string segments of the parent models in the binary code system. The basic elements to represent a parameter is different, i.e., a decimal digit or a binary digit. Even though the models or parameters may be recombined through the crossover, no basic elements of parents are changed for offspring models. Renewing basic elements depends only on the mutation. Assume that some of basic elements of a desired optimal model are absent in any parameter in the initial population, in other words, the optimal model and even optimal parameters do not attend in the initial population. The ineptly mutating search leads to failure in nding the desired solution. Consequently, an effective mutation is necessary for a genetic algorithm that can solve the geophysical inversion successfully.

3. Hybrid-encoding mechanism Inadequate encoding systems restrict the progression of individuals and their population. The binary encoding crossover is able to create more opportunities to inject fresh blood into the population, since the crossover operation may break up code-strings and result in new parameters that are reassembled instead of just a simple substitution of parameters. The decimal encoding mutation, on the other hand, can bring almost any essential gene, which is more effective in exploring the optimal solution (as analyzed in the prior section). The previous discussion manifests the advantage of introducing both encoding systems simultaneously for a complete evolution. The principle is that the mutation operation is conducted in the decimal code mechanism and other operations are conducted in the binary code mechanism. The procedure should provide more chances for creating new models. The algorithm is based on mixed-encoding mechanisms, i.e., a HEGA. The general stage of the HEGA can be described as follows: encoding all parameters of models in the binary code, constructing a model-space, generating an initial population, operating genetic selections and the crossover under the probabilities designed previously, transforming codes of models selected over the mutation from binary to decimal, operating the mutation in the decimal code, transforming back to the binary, and getting a new generation of the models, nally going through the subsequent evolution cycle.

4. Implementations of other improved techniques The genetic algorithm demonstrates a potential ability to resolve geophysical inversion in a special case. Even

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239 233

so, the equivalence of gravity and magnetic eld data and multi-extremum of an object function may still make evolving difcult. Therefore, other improved techniques in genetic algorithm such as multi-point crossover, high-probability mutation, creeping for local searching (Davis, 1991), and dynamic population size are applied to resolve these problems. In multi-point crossover the code-strings are broken at designated points and the parts among such points are swapped between the parents. The parameters may obtain more extensive gene-swap so that suitable parameters are reassembled quickly. Multi-point crossover cannot regenerate parameters with codes or genes that are out of the current population. From this point, the competence of HEGA depends greatly on mutation operations. Creeping for local searching, i.e., slightly perturbing some local genes, may provide plentiful opportunities for a small-scale mutation of parameters in an individual model. Slightly shifting a models position in the solution space is of benet in accelerating convergence especially at the stage of the model close to the goal in such cases as the inversion of potential eld-data. For a potential inversion problem, the objective function or tness is designed as relative to all parameters of a model. Any parameter that is separate from the solution may be a vitally bad model in tness even though other parameters t the solution. To prevent an aberrant individual model in tness produced by crossover from dying, high-probability mutation may provide chances to obtain better modication after coming up mutation. In the progression all parents and offspring have rights to be selected for the next generation if crossover and mutation operations are arranged in series. In this way parents and offspring from crossover operation have to go through mutation and vice versa. Therefore the population size is unstable or dynamic before a new generation is brought out. The selection scheme is conducted after other genetic operations. The members of the next generation will keep as the same population size as the initial generation.

5. Strategy of inversion The algorithm generally works in the routine as follows: (1) computing the anomaly caused by each individual model in the initial population; (2) comparing them with the observed data by the root-mean-square (RMS) error between the forward modeling data and observed data, and going through the genetic courses in HEGA; (3) choosing the best models with better tness (or the reciprocal of the RMS error) for next generation; and (4) renewing the population by natural selection, again computing the anomaly from each model in the

population and keeping evolution going generation by generation. When the optimal solution is determined, the iteration will stop. The inversion of geophysical data was simplied when genetic algorithms were introduced. A major reason for this simplication is that analytical relationships between the pending parameters and anomaly data are not required. The only thing we need to do is the natural selection and genetic operation. In general, the rst step of the evolution is selecting models in the model space and then constructing the initial population. The processes of selecting parameters in their ranges and combining models with them are random in this step. If the true model or an optimal model is fortunately selected in the initial population, it can be easily determined through only one generation. However, the best result can never come from a huge model space (with ten or more dimensions) if the true model or optimal model is not selected in the initial population. In a real test for the inversion of a synthetic model, the true model or even any parameter of the true model should be absent in the initial population. In other words, the optimal solutions (including model and parameters) should be excluded from the initial population. This exclusion is critical to examine the implementation of an algorithm. According to our experience in this study, the size of population can be chosen according to the number of pending parameters. Choosing the size (number of individual models) as 1020 times the number of parameters may have proper speeds of convergence and computation. In the practical world, we may obtain some details about our targets like the density of an anomalous body, limits of depths and positions, etc. The prior information can always be used to dene the ranges of parameters for the inversion. It is commonly accepted that a genetic algorithm should not depend on initial models. However, proper constraint is benecial to shorten the processing. If there is not sufcient data on the targets in hand, the genetic algorithm works in a wider range of the model space based on geological scenarios with larger steps to locate a closer range around targets. The regional search is a preparation to search real targets with precise steps. The local search works in the ranges according to inverted results of regional search. The model space is actually reduced after regional search. It makes the local search possible in detail with smaller steps. The implementation of regional-local search is to apply dynamic encoding. It is suitable for use in a multi-dimension model space. In the procedure of inversion, multi-point crossover can accelerate reassembling parameters that t the optimal model in the current population. Like choosing crossover positions, the number of crossover points is also determined randomly in our algorithm (from step one to step three). Application of creeping serves as a

ARTICLE IN PRESS
234 C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239

nearby search; in fact, it is a kind of mutation. It is used to nd adjacently suitable value around the parameter that is applied. This is a valuable technique for resolving an inverse problem with multiple extrema in a multidimension model space. Its application often brings surprise results especially when candidates are located close to the target. In this situation wide and random search does not provide more probability to focus on the neighborhood. The creeping, which is based on the different encoding, is applied to HEGA and SGA in the following experiments. The GA is a kind of a random sampling method of inversion because many of the genetic phases are random. We have paid more attention to the procedures than the results. The convergence and stability for an inversion method are signicant. It is predictable that convergent courses will not be coincident in multiple tests owing to their randomization. For this reason, as well as the existence of the ambiguity of geophysical inversion, the results nally reached will always be slightly different but often will be somewhere close to each other. This suggests that results normally have some random errors. To eliminate the random errors, an approximate but reasonable approachaveraging inverted modelsis recommended. The average is achieved from adequate trials with equal weights. It is taken as the nal solution, in spite of an optimal solution which may be included in the trials.

X
x1 z1 x2 z2

xk zk

Z
Fig. 1. Section shape of a horizontally polygonal column, (x1, z1), (x2, z2), y, (xk, zk) are coordinates of its vertices.

6. Forward modeling To represent a 2D-model, a horizontally polygonal column is usually employed to model the object. In fact, the shape of most 2D-objects in the xz plane can be approximately described by polygons. The gravity anomaly of a horizontally polygonal column is computed by giving coordinates on vertices of the polygon (Talwani et al., 1959). The expression is written as Dgx; z 2Gs "
n X

Fig. 2. Shape of synthetic models on a section: (a) Model-1 is a horizontal column with a trapezoid in the 2-D section; and (b) Model-2 is a horizontal column with a roof shape in 2-D section. Legends indicate searching domains relevant to vertices 1, 2, 3, and 4.

complicated non-linear inversion for coordinates (xk, zk) (k 1; 2; 3; . . . ; n).

xk zk1 xk1 zk xk1 xk 2 zk1 zk 2 k1 7. Comparison of search capabilities In order to compare search capabilities between the HEGA and the SGA, two horizontally quadrangular columns are selected in a computational test. Synthetic models, their shapes on the section (Model-1and Model-2) shown in Fig. 2 and with a constant density contrast of 1.0 g/cm3, will be inverted under various original conditions by using HEGA and SGA, respectively. The same evolving strategy is designed for both algorithms, which means keeping sizes of populations, domains of parameters, selective policies, probabilities

x2 z2 1 k1 xk1 xk zk1 zk ln k1 2 x2 z2 k k   x x 4 tg1 k1 tg1 k , zk1 zk where xk xk x and zk zk z, G is the gravitational constant, s denotes the density contrast of the object, and xk, zk are coordinates of vertex k of the object in prole, respectively (Fig. 1). In the course of computation, when shifting to the last vertex according to the equation (xn+1, zn+1) should be replaced by (x1, z1). From Eq. (4) we can assess that it is a

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239 235

going under the crossover, the mutation and the reproduction to the next generation, and terminations of evolution exactly the same. Ten trials have been done with Model-1 and Model-2 with different purposes. We dene the tness or reciprocal of the RMS error between theoretical anomaly data and those caused by the optimal model of the population in each generation as the symbol of evolution. The evolution will stop at 1000 generations despite distance between the optimal model and the real solution. 7.1. Regional search A wide range of parameters needs to be dened for the experiment to test the searching capability of the algorithm in a huge model space. Fig. 2a shows Model-1 and dened domains of the coordinates on four vertices. In each trial a hundred models are assembled randomly to construct the initial population. A model of the initial population can be congured in any shape with its vertices inside their ranges. Table 1 lists the optimal model of the initial population in each

trial. The original models do not obtain good shapes. The search step is 5 m. The convergence of HEGA and SGA is shown in Fig. 3. The vertical coordinate represents the RMS error, and the transect coordinate represents the number of generations through evolution in the diagram. Each curve depicts the process of convergence for one trial. To exhibit the details of convergence in the computation, we express the number of generations in a logarithm (Fig. 3). The convergence process using HEGA (Fig. 3a) or SGA (Fig. 3b) looks like an arbitrary course that we discussed previously. However, the average of results shown in Fig. 3c demonstrates the power of searching capability of HEGA that outperforms SGA. The curves of averaged results (Fig. 3c) describe the convergence of the inversion by using HEGA and SGA. Based on the graphs, HEGA converges with a little higher speed in comparison to SGA until the creeping is applied. In the experiment we set the probability of the normal mutation 0.3 instead of 0.1. The creeping starts to work after 500 generations. The setting is active for both algorithms. This setting dramatically increased the

Table 1 Models listed are of best t in a hundred initial individuals in trials, which are generated from model space of Model-1, shown in Fig. 2a (xi, zi) (m) Initially optimal models in 10 trials 1 x1 x2 x3 x4 z1 z2 z3 z4 201 288 338 188 12 2 35 64 2 231 297 319 170 13 14 59 70 3 230 263 324 166 14 5 61 62 4 257 293 353 130 8 46 64 49 5 260 301 284 144 11 30 85 35 6 242 309 370 167 14 41 59 82 7 236 303 246 200 12 26 98 96 8 271 267 328 142 14 2 77 55 9 179 258 396 151 24 16 93 33 10 176 284 361 179 1 5 74 20 225 275 325 175 10 10 60 60 Model-1

Note none of models in table is close to Model-1.

Average RMS errors (100 Gal)

RMS errors (100 Gal)

RMS errors (100 Gal)

1.6

Convergent curves through 10 trials by using SGA

1.6

Convergent curves through 10 trials by using HEGA with multipoint-crossover

Averaged convergent curves of 10 trials

0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000

SGA HEGA (multipoint-crossover)

1.2

1.2

0.8

0.8

0.4

0.4

0 1 10 100 1000

0 1 10 100 1000

(a)

Generations

(b)

Generations

(c)

Generations

Fig. 3. Comparison between convergences from inversions of Model-1 using HEGA with multi-point crossover and SGA: (a) and (b) show convergent curves in evolution processions, respectively. Individual curve indicates convergent course in a trial. Number of generations is explained in logarithm in order to expose details for (a) and (b). (c) Presents variation of averaged RMS errors from 10 trials.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
236 C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239

speed of convergence of the HEGA, but it did not work for the SGA (Fig. 3c). The advantage of mutation in the decimal code system of HEGA is demonstrated in the second part of its convergence (after 500 generations). Compared with the results of SGA, the nal RMS error of results of HEGA is only 15% of that of SGA (Fig. 3c). Most importantly, the RMS error associated with SGA reduced extremely slowly with increasing generations. This fact clearly shows that the decimal mutation in HEGA is more effective than SGA in searching new parameters in the model space. 7.2. Local searchresolution of model The next issue of concern is the resolution of models after the regional search of algorithms. Generally, we only gain either accuracy or efciency of inversion, but not both. Searching in the large range with a small step will take a long period of time and the time may be unpredictable. Fig. 3c shows a successful search in such a model space by an efcient convergence for the inversion of Model-1 with HEGA. The successful search has been partially approved by a tting error of less than 6 mGal (108 m/s2), referring to the anomaly amplitude of 1 mGal (105 m/s2). This kind of inversion, however, is an ill-posed problem mathematically. A triing error of the anomaly could introduce a fairly large ambiguous space of the model. Therefore, in order to compare the modeling resolutions by both algorithms the experiment for a ne search must be completed. Model-2 is inverted under the condition that searching is conducted in the relatively denite model space, shown in Fig. 2b. Considering the high resolution required, we search with a step of 1 m. This means we should t the solution delicately in the model space. It is accomplished under the same phases and policies as those in the inversion of Model-1. Fig. 4 shows the convergent procession of the inversion by HEGA and SGA in two situations, with or without multi-point crossover. The effects of the multi-point crossover are
Convergent curves through 10 trials by using SGA

obvious for SGA and subtle for HEGA. The nal RMS error associated with HEGA is only 15% of the RMS error with SGA (Fig. 4c). This fact clearly demonstrated that HEGA is superior to SGA in searching the global optimal model. The nal models from four algorithms are listed in Table 2.

8. Pseudo-synthetic examples Two synthetic models with a constant density contrast of 1.0 g/cm3 are computed by HEGA with multi-point crossover to demonstrate its feasibility for resolving more complicated problems. The inversion is done in two phases, regional and local searches. Rather large range Model-3 (Fig. 5) is of a lentoid shape like an ore deposit. Twenty parameters that describe the model need to be inverted. This optimization problem will be xed in the 20-dimensional space. The inversion is divided into two phases, regional and local searches.

Table 2 Solutions from 10 trials are listed (xi, zi) (m) Model-2 Solutions from four algorithms SGA SGA-MC HEGA HEGA-MC x1 x2 x3 x4 z1 z2 z3 z4 250 330 250 170 10 60 40 60 250.2 330.1 249.6 169.6 9.9 60.9 39.8 59.8 249.7 330.8 253 171.1 10.1 59.1 40.1 60.8 249.9 329.8 249.4 169.8 10 59.8 40 60.3 250 329.8 249.4 169.8 10 60 40 60

Averaging results give a better model that is closer to Model 2 (Fig. 2b). Solution from HEGA with multi-point crossover (HEGA-MC) is more accurate than those from SGA, SGA with multi-point crossover (SGA-MA), and HEGA.
Averaged RMS errors (100 Gal)
Averaged convergent curves of 10 trials
0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000

0.06

RMS errors (100 Gal)

RMS errors (100 Gal)

0.08

0.08

Convergent curves through 10 trials by using HEGA with multipoint-crossover

0.06

SGA SGA (multipoint-crossover) HEGA HEGA (multipoint-crossover)

0.04

0.04

0.02

0.02

0 1 10 100 1000

0 1 10 100 1000

(a)

Generations

(b)

Generations

(c)

Generations

Fig. 4. Comparison between convergences from inversions of Model-2 using HEGA with multi-point crossover and SGA: (a) and (b) show convergent curves in evolution processions, respectively. Individual curve indicates convergent course in a trial. Number of generations is explained in logarithm in order to expose details for (a) and (b). (c) Presents variation of averaged RMS errors from 10 trials.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239
Gravity Anomaly/ (100 Gal)
16

237

12

Model-3 Inverted model-2

X /m
0 0 100 200 300 400 500

Depth/m

-20 -40 -60 -80

Fig. 5. Inversion of Model-3 using HEGA with multi-point crossover. Computed anomaly from inverted model exactly t to theoretical anomaly data from Model-3. Results from average of models in 20 trials.

Table 3 Inverted coordinates of Model-3 and theoretical model are listed (Fig. 5) No. Model-3 x (m) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 110 220 290 390 310 250 220 180 170 150 z (m) 20 10 20 20 30 40 60 60 40 40 Inverted model x(m) 110.25 219.75 289.35 391.05 308.4 248.9 219.85 179.3 169.45 148.95 z(m) 20.1 9.7 19.05 19.7 29.3 39.5 59.45 59.85 39.45 40.05

9. A real-world example High-resolution microgravity data were acquired in hopes of detecting unused utility pipes and other unknown objects underground in a job site in Hubei, China. The surface of the site is relatively at (relative elevation change is less than 0.5 m) and the bedrock lies about 15 m deep under the clay layer around the site. The measurement was acquired using a LaCoste and Romberg gravimeter (D-model) along a line that crosses the trend of the suspected sewer pipe and drainpipes. The Bouguer anomaly data are shown in Fig. 7. Noises in the Bouguer anomaly were mainly caused by observation errors and other unpredictable small objects. The gravity anomalies of the targets are, at a certain degree, twisted by noise. However, three individual anomalies can be identied roughly. According to the shapes of gravity anomalies, we designed three quadrangular horizontal columns to t three local anomalies. The inverted models are obtained using HEGA constrained by the following predictions: the central depth of the sewer is within 08 m, the central depth of the drainpipe is within 03 m, the central depth of a hard object is within 02 m, the horizontal ranges are 39, 1115 and 1517 m from the starting station the survey line, and the density contrasts are 2.1, 0.5, and 2.1 g/cm3 for these three targets, respectively. The step of variation of the coordinates of the pending objects was 0.2 m. Five trials after evolving a thousand generations had to be done, and the averaged coordinates delineate the objects achieved. The inversion presents three interpretable quadrangular objects (Fig. 7) that were veried by excavating:

Inverted model shown in table is average of results in 20 trials.

Table 3 lists the average results of inversion by HEGA under 20 trials. The inverted object is in a close proximity of the model (Fig. 5). Model-4 (Fig. 6) is similar to Model-3, with higher density and a lentoid shape in the xz plane, but its bottom boundary forms a convexity that makes the object shape complex. The purpose of designing such bottom surface of the model is to test the capability of the approach to nding a complex model, especially the vertical resolution of the model. The result of inversion shown in Fig. 6 illustrates that the algorithm is able to resolve complicated 2D inversion problems without data noise. The bottom boundary is described with acceptable accuracy.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
238 C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239
10 8 6 4 2 0

Gravity Anomaly/(100 Gal)

Model-4 Inverted model-4

X/ m
0 0 100 200 300 400 500

Depth/m

-20 -40 -60 -80

Fig. 6. Inversion of Model-4 using HEGA with multi-point crossover. Computed anomaly from inverted model t theoretical anomaly data from Model-4 with little error. Inverted model depicts Model-4 in detail, especially in bottom boundary.

Gravity anomaly/(10-8m/s2)

0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -100

Observed anomaly Inverted anomaly

Distance/m
0 5 10 15 20 1
Sewer

25

2 3
-2

2
Depth/m

Disused base

-4

1
-6

Drainpipe

Inversed boundary of object

-8

Fig. 7. Inversion of a gravity anomaly at a job site in Hubei, China. Because maximum amplitude of anomaly is only about 50 108 m/s2 (0.05 mGal), cultural noise in observed data is obvious. Noise prevents theoretical anomaly data from perfectly tting observed data. Nevertheless, under adequate constrains and evolving strategies of HEGA, inverted models successfully dened targets.

a sewage pipe (object 1), an unused concrete building foundation (object 2), and a drainpipe (object 3). This example shows that HEGA possesses an adequately evolving strategy to obtain a truthful solution.

10. Discussion and conclusions Using a single encoding system for all genetic operations will limit its searching capability in a

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Chen et al. / Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 230239 239

global solution. Introducing the hybrid-encoding mechanism into genetic algorithms can enhance the search capability of genetic operation. The hybrid-encoding mechanism (HEGA) is proving to be successful in searching a global optimal model. For the complicated optimal problems such as geophysical inversion, other techniques like multi-point crossover, high-probability mutation, creeping for local searching, and dynamic population size are helpful. The synthetic and real-world examples demonstrate HEGA possesses wider searching scope and higher resolution in solving geophysical inverse problems. The examples indicate that mutation in the decimal code plays a key role in searching new parameters of the model. Generally, the two-step strategy (regional and local) search needs to be considered for determining unknown parameters with wide-value ranges. This research illustrates the uniform step-length search. Variable step-length search has little effort on our examples. The two-step strategy algorithm can reduce wandered search and make it easier to nd ne objects. It is important to point out that desired results should come from multiple performances of the genetic algorithm. More attempts can provide a better chance of obtaining a truthful solution that is obtained by averaging results from completed trials. Our research may provide an encouraging direction to explore evolution algorithms.

Acknowledgments The theoretical research was supported by Hubei Nature Science Foundation. We thank Wuhan Yejin Exploration Institute for funding the gravity survey. The authors appreciate the efforts of Marla Adkins-Heljeson and Mary Brohammer of the Kansas Geological Survey in editing of the manuscript.

References
Berg, E., 1990. Simple convergent genetic algorithm for inversion of multiparameter data. In: Proceedings of the 60th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 11261128. Berg, E., 1991. Convergent genetic algorithm for inversion. In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 948950. Boschetti, F., Dentith, M., List, R., 1996. Inversion of seismic refraction data using genetic algorithms. Geophysics, 17151727.

Curtis, A., Snieder, R., 1997. Reconditioning inverse problems using the genetic algorithm and revised parameterization. Geophysics 62, 15241532. Davis, L., 1991. Handbook on Genetic Algorithms. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY. Docherty, P., Silva, R., Singh, S., Song, Z.M., Wood, M., 1997. Migration velocity analysis using a genetic algorithm. Geophysical Prospecting 45, 865878. Farrell, S.M., Jessell, M.W., Barr, T.D., 1996. Inversion of geological and geophysical data sets using genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 66th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 14041406. Goldberg, D.E., 1989. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. Addison Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA 412pp. He, Q., Fu, D., 1999. The improvement of genetic algorithm and its applications for the inversion of orthorhombic anisotropic media. In: Proceedings of the 69th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 17911792. Holland, J.H., 1975. Adaptation in Natural and Articial Systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI 183pp. (reprint edition, 1992, MIT Press). Ji, Y., Singh, S., Hornby, B., 2000. Sensitivity study using a genetic algorithm: inversion of amplitude variations with slowness. Geophysical Prospecting 48, 10531074. Mallick, S., 1996. Prestack waveform inversion of the east Texas Woodbine gas sands using a genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 58th Meeting, European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers, Session: C050. Mallick, S., 1999. Some practical aspects of prestack waveform inversion using a genetic algorithm: an example from the east Texas woodbine gas sand. Geophysics 64, 326336. Porsani, M., Ursin, B., 2000. Deconvolution and wavelet estimation by using a genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 70th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 21852188. Roth, M., Holliger, K., 1998. Joint inversion of Rayleigh and guided waves in high-resolution seismic data using a genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 68th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 15701573. Schraudolph, N.N., Belew, R.K., 1992. Dynamic parameter encoding for genetic algorithm. Machine Learning 9 (9), 921. Talwani, M.J., Worzel, L., Landisman, M., 1959. Rapid gravity computations for two-dimensional bodies with application to the Mendocino submarine fracture zone. Journal of Geophysical Research 64 (1), 4959. Wilson, W.G., Laidlaw, W.G., Vasudevan, K., 1994. Residual statics estimation using the genetic algorithm. Geophysics 59, 766774. Wu, W.-H., Lin, C.-Y., 2004. Hybrid-coded crossover for binary-coded genetic algorithms in constrained optimization. Engineering Optimization 36 (1), 101122. Zhang, X., Fang, H., Dai, G., 1997. Study on encoding mechanism of genetic algorithm. Information and Control 26, 134139.