Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 65 references

OpenSWI: A Massive-Scale Benchmark Dataset for Surface Wave Dispersion Curve Inversion

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Massive synthetic seismic dataset aims to standardize AI-driven surface wave inversion.

desk verdict A potentially valuable benchmark for ML-based surface wave inversion, but the abstract alone can't support the generalization claim and the supplied full text is the wrong paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.10749 v1 pith:NKXQLVSX submitted 2025-08-14 physics.geo-ph

Feng Liu , Sijie Zhao , Xinyu Gu , Fenghua Ling , Peiqin Zhuang , Yaxing Li , Rui Su , Lihua Fang
show 3 more authors
Lianqing Zhou Jianping Huang Lei Bai
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.geo-ph
keywords surfacewavedispersioncurveinversionmachinelearningbenchmarkdatasetseismictomographySWIDPshallowexplorationdeepEarth
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

OpenSWI is a large-scale benchmark dataset for training and testing machine-learning methods that infer underground structure from surface wave dispersion curves. It contains over 22 million shallow and 1.26 million deep synthetic velocity–dispersion pairs, plus two real-world observation sets. The paper's central claim is that this synthetic diversity is sufficient for models trained only on synthetic data to generalize to real observed dispersion data. If true, researchers gain a shared resource to develop, compare, and validate inversion methods without collecting or labeling their own seismic data.

What carries the argument

The Surface Wave Inversion Dataset Preparation (SWIDP) pipeline, which converts 1-D velocity profiles into paired fundamental-mode phase and group velocity dispersion curves. This forward-modeling machinery generates the large synthetic label set, and the breadth of source geological models determines the structural diversity that is intended to make trained models transfer to real observations.

What would settle it

Train an inversion model on OpenSWI-shallow and -deep, then evaluate it on a held-out real dataset recorded by a different seismic network and processed with an independent dispersion-extraction workflow; if prediction errors on that set are substantially larger than on OpenSWI-real, the dataset's representativeness claim would be falsified. Alternatively, compute dispersion curves from OpenSWI-real's reference models using an independent forward solver and compare them to the observed curves—systematic mismatch would reveal the simplified forward model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the primary obstacle to deep-learning surface wave inversion is the absence of a large, diverse benchmark, not a shortage of model architectures. To remove that obstacle, it introduces OpenSWI, built through the Surface Wave Inversion Dataset Preparation (SWIDP) pipeline. OpenSWI-shallow derives over 22 million 1-D velocity–dispersion pairs from the 2-D OpenFWI geological models; OpenSWI-deep supplies 1.26 million pairs from 14 global and regional 3-D geological models; OpenSWI-real provides observed dispersion curves with reference models for generalization testing. The reported agreement between models trained on the synthetic sets and the real-data references is pres

Load-bearing premise

The SWIDP forward model produces dispersion curves that faithfully represent real surface wave dispersion for the modeled structures, and the reference models paired with OpenSWI-real are independent ground truth rather than artifacts of the same inversion assumptions that machine learning is meant to replace.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Researchers will be able to train and compare machine-learning inversion models on a common benchmark, making results across studies directly comparable.
  • Models trained on OpenSWI could avoid the strong sensitivity to initial models that plagues traditional dispersion curve inversion.
  • The released SWIDP toolbox allows the community to generate extended or custom synthetic benchmarks for specialized regions or wave modes.
  • The two real-data sets provide a standardized test for generalization, letting practitioners benchmark how well synthetic-trained models perform on observed data.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The dataset's structure could transfer to neighboring inverse problems, such as receiver-function inversion or ambient-noise tomography, wherever the input can be represented as dispersion or spectral curves.
  • The benchmark is built around dispersion-curve misfit; if an application requires full-waveform matching, the synthetic diversity may need to be extended to waveform-level targets.
  • OpenSWI-real is a single generalization probe; whether the synthetic coverage truly spans the real-data manifold would be tested more rigorously by holding out additional, independently processed real datasets from different regions and networks.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents OpenSWI, a benchmark dataset for machine-learning inversion of surface-wave dispersion curves. The dataset is generated by a 'Surface Wave Inversion Dataset Preparation (SWIDP)' pipeline and comprises three components: OpenSWI-shallow (over 22 million 1-D velocity/depth profiles paired with fundamental-mode phase and group velocity dispersion curves, derived from the OpenFWI geological models), OpenSWI-deep (1.26 million pairs from 14 global/regional 3-D geological models), and OpenSWI-real (two real-world observed dispersion-curve sets with corresponding reference models). The authors train ML models on the synthetic datasets, evaluate them on OpenSWI-real, and report 'strong agreement' as evidence of the dataset's diversity and representativeness. They release the SWIDP toolbox, datasets, and trained models. The abstract is the only substantive part of the manuscript that matches the claimed arXiv title; the supplied full text is an unrelated condensed-matter paper on SrTiO3.

Significance. If the claims are correct, OpenSWI would fill a genuine gap: a large, standardized, open benchmark for developing and comparing ML methods for surface-wave dispersion inversion. The scale (22M+ shallow and 1.26M deep pairs) and the plan to release code, data, and trained models are significant community contributions. However, the utility of the benchmark rests on two premises that are not established in the available material: (i) that SWIDP's forward modeling faithfully reproduces real dispersion curves, and (ii) that the reference models paired with the real curves are independent ground truth rather than products of a conventional inversion of the same curves. The current abstract-level presentation, with no quantitative evaluation, does not substantiate these premises.

major comments (4)
  1. [Full text (all sections)] The supplied full text is not the OpenSWI manuscript; it is an unrelated study of quantum phase transitions in SrTiO3 (arXiv:2508.10735). None of the technical sections that would support the abstract are present: the SWIDP pipeline, forward-modeling equations, quality-control thresholds, network architectures, training details, evaluation metrics, or dataset documentation. The central claims of the abstract are therefore unsupported in the reviewed material. This mismatch must be corrected before the paper can be evaluated.
  2. [Abstract] The utility demonstration rests on the claim of 'strong agreement between predictions and references' on OpenSWI-real. No quantitative metric is given (e.g., RMSE, MAE, R², correlation), no baseline is compared (e.g., conventional inversion or a simple regressor), and no uncertainty estimate is reported. A benchmark dataset paper should include concrete evaluation numbers, per-dataset breakdowns, and ideally a comparison against standard deterministic inversion results. Without these, the generalization claim is not assessable.
  3. [OpenSWI-real, Abstract] The 'corresponding reference models' in OpenSWI-real are the linchpin of the generalization claim. If these reference models were obtained by conventional dispersion-curve inversion of the same observed curves, using a forward code compatible with SWIDP's, then the agreement only demonstrates self-consistency between the synthetic generator and the inversion code—not that the trained models generalize to real Earth structure. The paper must document the provenance of the real reference models (source project, inversion algorithm, forward-modeling assumptions, regularization, and uncertainty) and explicitly demonstrate that they are independent of SWIDP. This is a load-bearing point for the dataset's claimed representativeness.
  4. [Abstract and dataset descriptions] The claims that OpenSWI-shallow spans 'a wide range of shallow geological structures' and that OpenSWI-deep contains 'high-fidelity' velocity-dispersion pairs are not supported by any quantitative distributional summaries. A benchmark intended for ML generalization should report coverage statistics: velocity and layer-thickness ranges, number of layers, structural families, noise levels, and a comparison of the synthetic input distribution to the real-data distribution. Such statistics are necessary to judge whether the dataset diversity is sufficient for the claimed generalization.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The term 'AI-ready' is undefined. Please specify the exact file formats (e.g., HDF5, NumPy, Parquet), data schema, and access/download mechanism, as these are critical for reproducibility and community adoption.
  2. [OpenSWI-real, Abstract] The abstract mentions 'two sets of observed dispersion curves' but gives no metadata: geographic regions, frequency bands, number of stations, or data sources. This information is needed to judge the breadth of the real-world evaluation and to compare with other datasets.
  3. [Abstract] The limitation to 'fundamental-mode phase and group velocity dispersion curves' is an important simplification. The paper should state explicitly that higher modes, off-path propagation, and 3-D heterogeneity are excluded, and discuss how this may affect generalization to real data where these effects are present.
  4. [Abstract] The phrase 'massive-scale' is appealing but the abstract gives only pair counts; file sizes, storage requirements, and the number of independent geological scenarios (rather than pairs) would better characterize the dataset's diversity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity demonstrable from the abstract; the OpenSWI-real evaluation is an external anchor, and the supplied body text is a different paper, so no reduction of predictions to inputs can be exhibited.

full rationale

The abstract's derivation chain is: (1) synthetic 1-D velocity profiles are derived from geological models (OpenFWI, global/regional 3-D models); (2) dispersion curves are generated from those profiles by the SWIDP forward-modeling pipeline; (3) OpenSWI-real contains observed dispersion curves with corresponding reference models from open-source projects; (4) models trained on synthetic data are evaluated on OpenSWI-real by comparing predictions to those references. On its face, this is an external generalization test: the observed curves and their reference models are not defined in terms of the ML predictions or of the SWIDP synthetic generator. The skeptic's concern that the OpenSWI-real reference models may themselves be conventional inversions of the same dispersion curves is a hypothesis about provenance, not a reduction exhibited by the paper's supplied text. No equation, definition, or citation in the available material makes the predicted dispersion-curve inversion equivalent to the benchmark's own inputs. The supplied full text is actually a different arXiv paper (SrTiO3 quantum phase transitions), so the detailed SWIDP methodology and OpenSWI-real provenance are absent; this is a manuscript/input integrity issue, not a demonstrated circularity. Consequently, no specific circular step can be quoted, and the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

From the abstract only. No explicit free parameters are disclosed; the SWIDP pipeline configuration (period band, mode truncation, noise and QC thresholds) is invisible, so two hand-chosen configuration families are listed without values. The load-bearing axioms are: (1) the forward dispersion modeling is faithful to real surface wave physics; (2) the source geological models are representative; (3) the OpenSWI-real reference models are trustworthy ground truth. No invented physical entities were identified.

free parameters (2)
  • SWIDP forward-modeling configuration (period band, mode truncation)
    Choices in the pipeline determine what signal the synthetic dispersion curves encode; not disclosed in the abstract.
  • Quality control and filtering thresholds for OpenSWI-real samples
    Selection criteria for the observed curves and their reference models shape the test set; not disclosed in the abstract.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Fundamental-mode dispersion curves can be forward-modeled accurately from 1-D velocity profiles
    The entire synthetic dataset is generated by this step. If the forward model (mode theory, spherical or flat-Earth assumptions, attenuation neglect) is biased, all downstream training inherits the bias. Invoked by the abstract's 'Surface Wave Inversion Dataset Preparation (SWIDP) pipeline'.
  • domain assumption The source geological models are representative of real shallow and deep Earth structure
    OpenSWI-shallow inherits the OpenFWI 2-D model suite (flat layers, faults, folds, realistic stratigraphy) and OpenSWI-deep uses 14 global/regional 3-D models. The diversity and 'representativeness' claims rest on these being a fair sample of Earth's crust and mantle.
  • domain assumption Reference models paired with observed dispersion curves in OpenSWI-real are reliable ground truth
    The generalization evaluation compares model predictions to these references. If the references were produced by conventional inversion with assumptions that ML methods aim to replicate, the 'strong agreement' could reflect shared bias rather than generalization. Stated in the abstract as 'observed dispersion curves with corresponding reference models'.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of OpenSWI: A Massive-Scale Benchmark Dataset for Surface Wave Dispersion Curve Inversion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NKXQLVSX

@misc{pith2026250810749,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: OpenSWI: A Massive-Scale Benchmark Dataset for Surface Wave Dispersion Curve Inversion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NKXQLVSX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.10749}
}
read the original abstract

Surface wave dispersion curve inversion plays a critical role in both shallow resource exploration and deep geological studies, yet it remains hindered by sensitivity to initial models and low computational efficiency. Recently, data-driven deep learning methods, inspired by advances in computer vision, have shown promising potential to address these challenges. However, the lack of large-scale, diverse benchmark datasets remains a major obstacle to their development and evaluation. To bridge this gap, we present OpenSWI, a comprehensive benchmark dataset generated through the Surface Wave Inversion Dataset Preparation (SWIDP) pipeline. OpenSWI includes two synthetic datasets tailored to different research scales and scenarios, OpenSWI-shallow and OpenSWI-deep, and an AI-ready real-world dataset for generalization evaluation, OpenSWI-real. OpenSWI-shallow, derived from the 2-D OpenFWI geological model dataset, contains over 22 million 1-D velocity profiles paired with fundamental-mode phase and group velocity dispersion curves, spanning a wide range of shallow geological structures (e.g., flat layers, faults, folds, realistic stratigraphy). OpenSWI-deep, built from 14 global and regional 3-D geological models, comprises 1.26 million high-fidelity 1-D velocity-dispersion pairs for deep-Earth studies. OpenSWI-real, compiled from open-source projects, contains two sets of observed dispersion curves with corresponding reference models, serving as a benchmark for evaluating model generalization. To demonstrate utility, we trained models on OpenSWI-shallow and -deep and evaluated them on OpenSWI-real, demonstrating strong agreement between predictions and references, which confirms the diversity and representativeness of the dataset. To advance intelligent surface wave inversion, we release the SWIDP toolbox, OpenSWI datasets, and trained models for the research community.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eid howpublished institution isbn issn journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1...

    work page

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION if.digit duplicate "0" = swap duplicate "1" = swap duplicate "2" = swap duplicate "3" = swap duplicate "4" = swap duplicate "5" = swap duplicate "6" = swap duplicate "7" = swap duplicate "8" = swap "9" = or or or or or or or or or FUNCTION n.separate 't := "" #0 'numnames := t empty not t #-1 #1 subs...

    work page

  3. [3]

    28 largesymbols

    \@lbibitem[??(????)] \@undefined @set@cites @set@cites \@citex @citex \@undefined begindocument/end [copernicus/natbib] \@citex @citex thebibliography [1] @secline * - @ \@biblabel NAT@ctr \@bibsetup ##1 NAT@ctr 0 @openbib .11em \@plus.33em \@minus.07em `\.=1000 \@noitemerr natbib Empty `thebibliography' environment - @stage@final @manuscript [1] biblio *...

    arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    and Stucchi, E.: A Hybrid Residual Neural Network-- Monte Carlo Approach to Invert Surface Wave Dispersion Data, Near Surface Geophysics, 19, 397--414, doi:10.1002/nsg.12163, 2021

    Aleardi, M. and Stucchi, E.: A Hybrid Residual Neural Network-- Monte Carlo Approach to Invert Surface Wave Dispersion Data, Near Surface Geophysics, 19, 397--414, doi:10.1002/nsg.12163, 2021

    work page doi:10.1002/nsg.12163 2021

  5. [5]

    Spectral functions and dynamic critical behavior of relativistic $Z_2$ theories

    Bensen, G. D., Ritzwoller, M. H., Barmin, M. P., Levshin, A. L., Lin, F., Moschetti, M. P., Shapiro, N. M., and Yang, Y.: Processing Seismic Ambient Noise Data to Obtain Reliable Broad-Band Surface Wave Dispersion Measurements, Geophysical Journal International, 169, 1239--1260, doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03374.x, 2007

    work page Pith review arXiv 2007

  6. [6]

    M., Lin, F.-C., Allam, A., Schulte-Pelkum, V., Ward, K

    Berg, E. M., Lin, F.-C., Allam, A., Schulte-Pelkum, V., Ward, K. M., and Shen, W.: Shear Velocity Model of Alaska via Joint Inversion of Rayleigh Wave Ellipticity, Phase Velocities, and Receiver Functions across the Alaska Transportable Array, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 125, doi:10.1029/2019jb018582, 2020

    work page doi:10.1029/2019jb018582 2020

  7. [7]

    Blom, N., Gokhberg, A., and Fichtner, A.: Seismic Waveform Tomography of the Central and Eastern Mediterranean Upper Mantle, Solid Earth, 11, 669--690, doi:10.5194/se-11-669-2020, 2020

    work page doi:10.5194/se-11-669-2020 2020

  8. [8]

    M.: Empirical Relations between Elastic Wavespeeds and Density in the Earth's Crust, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 95, 2081--2092, doi:10.1785/0120050077, 2005

    Brocher, T. M.: Empirical Relations between Elastic Wavespeeds and Density in the Earth's Crust, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 95, 2081--2092, doi:10.1785/0120050077, 2005

    work page doi:10.1785/0120050077

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    Cai, A., Qiu, H., and Niu, F.: Semi- Supervised Surface Wave Tomography With Wasserstein Cycle - Consistent GAN : Method and Application to Southern California Plate Boundary Region , Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127, e2021JB023\,598, doi:10.1029/2021JB023598, 2022

    2022 doi

  2. [10]

    Cao, R., Earp, S., De Ridder, S. A. L., Curtis, A., and Galetti, E.: Near-Real-Time near-Surface 3D Seismic Velocity and Uncertainty Models by Wavefield Gradiometry and Neural Network Inversion of Ambient Seismic Noise, GEOPHYSICS, 85, KS13--KS27, doi:10.1190/geo2018-0562.1, 2020

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    Chen, X., Xia, J., Feng, J., Cheng, F., Pang, J., and Hong, Y.: Why Choose Deep Learning for Surface-Wave Inversion , Surveys in Geophysics, 46, 695--722, doi:10.1007/s10712-025-09882-y, 2025

    2025 doi

  4. [12]

    Colli, L., Fichtner, A., and Bunge, H.-P.: Full Waveform Tomography of the Upper Mantle in the South Atlantic Region: Imaging a Westward Fluxing Shallow Asthenosphere?, Tectonophysics, 604, 26--40, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2013.06.015, 2013

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    C ubuk-Sabuncu, Y., Taymaz, T., and Fichtner, A.: 3- D Crustal Velocity Structure of Western Turkey : Constraints from Full-Waveform Tomography, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 270, 90--112, doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2017.06.014, 2017

    2017 doi

  6. [14]

    Deng, C., Feng, S., Wang, H., Zhang, X., Jin, P., Feng, Y., Zeng, Q., Chen, Y., and Lin, Y.: OpenFWI : Large-scale Multi-Structural Benchmark Datasets for Full Waveform Inversion, Neural Information Processing Systems, 2021

    2021

  7. [15]

    Feng, S., Wang, H., Deng, C., Feng, Y., Liu, Y., Zhu, M., Jin, P., Chen, Y., and Lin, Y.: EFWI Multiparameter Benchmark Datasets for Elastic Full Waveform Inversion of Geophysical Properties, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 23\,701--23\,713, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    Fichtner, A. and Villase \ n or, A.: Crust and Upper Mantle of the Western Mediterranean -- Constraints from Full-Waveform Inversion, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 428, 52--62, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2015.07.038, 2015

    2015 doi

  9. [17]

    Fichtner, A., Bunge, H.-P., and Igel, H.: The Adjoint Method in Seismology, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 157, 86--104, doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2006.03.016, 2006

    2006 doi

  10. [18]

    Fichtner, A., Kennett, B. L. N., Igel, H., and Bunge, H.-P.: Full Seismic Waveform Tomography for Upper-Mantle Structure in the Australasian Region Using Adjoint Methods, Geophysical Journal International, 179, 1703--1725, doi:10.1111/j.1365-246x.2009.04368.x, 2009

    2009 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Fichtner, A., Kennett, B. L., Igel, H., and Bunge, H.-P.: Full Waveform Tomography for Radially Anisotropic Structure: New Insights into Present and Past States of the Australasian Upper Mantle, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 290, 270--280, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2009.12.003, 2010

    2009 doi

  12. [20]

    Fichtner, A., Trampert, J., Cupillard, P., Saygin, E., Taymaz, T., Capdeville, Y., and Villase \ n or, A.: Multiscale Full Waveform Inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 194, 534--556, doi:10.1093/gji/ggt118, 2013

    2013 doi

  13. [21]

    Fichtner, A., van Herwaarden , D.-P., Afanasiev, M., Simut \.e , S., Krischer, L., C ubuk-Sabuncu, Y., Taymaz, T., Colli, L., Saygin, E., Villase \ n or, A., Trampert, J., Cupillard, P., Bunge, H.-P., and Igel, H.: The Collaborative Seismic Earth Model: Generation 1, Geophysic...

    2018 doi

  14. [22]

    Foti, S., Comina, C., Boiero, D., and Socco, L.: Non-Uniqueness in Surface-Wave Inversion and Consequences on Seismic Site Response Analyses, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 29, 982--993, doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2008.11.004, 2009

    2008 doi

  15. [23]

    J., and Strobbia, C.: Surface Wave Methods for Near-Surface Site Characterization, CRC Press, 0 edn., ISBN 978-0-429-17853-5, doi:10.1201/b17268, 2014

    Foti, S., Lai, C., Rix, G. J., and Strobbia, C.: Surface Wave Methods for Near-Surface Site Characterization, CRC Press, 0 edn., ISBN 978-0-429-17853-5, doi:10.1201/b17268, 2014

    2014 doi

  16. [24]

    Fu, L., Pan, L., Li, Z., Dong, S., Ma, Q., and Chen, X.: Improved High-resolution 3D vs Model of Long Beach, CA : Inversion of Multimodal Dispersion Curves from Ambient Noise of a Dense Array, Geophysical Research Letters, 49, e2021GL097\,619, doi:10.1029/2021GL097619, 2022

    2022 doi

  17. [25]

    Gan, Y., Yang, Z., Pan, L., Sun, Y.-C., Zhang, D., Gao, Y., and Chen, X.: Deep Learning-Based Dispersion Spectrum Inversion for Surface Wave Exploration , IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 62, 1--11, doi:10.1109/TGRS.2024.3399033, 2024

    2024

  18. [26]

    Gao, H., Wu, X., Sun, X., Hou, M., Gao, H., Wang, G., and Sheng, H.: cigFacies : A Massive-Scale Benchmark Dataset of Seismic Facies and Its Application, Earth System Science Data, 17, 595--609, doi:10.5194/essd-17-595-2025, 2025

    2025 doi

  19. [27]

    Haskell, N. A.: The Dispersion of Surface Waves on Multilayered Media, in: Vincit Veritas : A Portrait of the Life and Work of Norman Abraham Haskell , 1905--1970, edited by Ben-Menahem, A., vol. 43, pp. 86--103, American Geophysical Union, Washington, D. C., ISBN 978-0-87590-...

    1905 doi

  20. [28]

    B.: Computer Programs in Seismology: An Evolving Tool for Instruction and Research, Seismological Research Letters, 84, 1081--1088, doi:10.1785/0220110096, 2013

    Herrmann, R. B.: Computer Programs in Seismology: An Evolving Tool for Instruction and Research, Seismological Research Letters, 84, 1081--1088, doi:10.1785/0220110096, 2013

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    Ho, J., Jain, A., and Abbeel, P.: Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2006.11239, 2020

    2006 doi arXiv

  22. [30]

    Hu, J., Qiu, H., Zhang, H., and Ben-Zion , Y.: Using Deep Learning to Derive Shear-Wave Velocity Models from Surface-Wave Dispersion Data , Seismological Research Letters, 91, 1738--1751, doi:10.1785/0220190222, 2020

    2020 doi

  23. [31]

    Huang, X., Yu, Z., Wang, W., and Wang, F.: JointNet : A Multimodal Deep Learning-Based Approach for Joint Inversion of Rayleigh Wave Dispersion and Ellipticity , Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 114, 627--641, doi:10.1785/0120230199, 2024

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    Jiang, Y., Ma, J., Ning, J., Li, J., Wu, H., and Bao, T.: One- Fit - All Transformer for Multimodal Geophysical Inversion : Method and Application , Journal of Geophysical Research: Machine Learning and Computation, 2, e2024JH000\,432, doi:10.1029/2024JH000432, 2025

    2025 doi

  25. [33]

    Krischer, L., Fichtner, A., Boehm, C., and Igel, H.: Automated Large-scale Full Seismic Waveform Inversion for North America and the North Atlantic, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 123, 5902--5928, doi:10.1029/2017JB015289, 2018

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

    Lin, F.-C., Li, D., Clayton, R. W., and Hollis, D.: High-Resolution 3D Shallow Crustal Structure in Long Beach, California: Application of Ambient Noise Tomography on a Dense Seismic Array, Geophysics, 78, Q45--Q56, doi:10.1190/geo2012-0453.1, 2013

    2013 doi

  27. [35]

    Liu, F., Li, J., Fu, L., and Lu, L.: Multimodal Surface Wave Inversion with Automatic Differentiation, Geophysical Journal International, 238, 290--312, doi:10.1093/gji/ggae155, 2024

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    Liu, F., Deng, B., Su, R., Bai, L., and Ouyang, W.: DispFormer : Pretrained Transformer for Flexible Dispersion Curve Inversion from Global Synthesis to Regional Applications, doi:10.48550/ARXIV.2501.04366, 2025

    2025 doi arXiv

  29. [37]

    Lu, Y., Stehly, L., Paul, A., and AlpArray Working Group : High-Resolution Surface Wave Tomography of the European Crust and Uppermost Mantle from Ambient Seismic Noise, Geophysical Journal International, 214, 1136--1150, doi:10.1093/gji/ggy188, 2018

    2018 doi

  30. [38]

    Luo, Y., Huang, Y., Yang, Y., Zhao, K., Yang, X., and Xu, H.: Constructing Shear Velocity Models from Surface Wave Dispersion Curves Using Deep Learning, Journal of Applied Geophysics, 196, 104\,524, doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2021.104524, 2022

    2021

  31. [39]

    P., Griffith, D

    Merrifield, T. P., Griffith, D. P., Zamanian, S. A., Gesbert, S., Sen, S., De La Torre Guzman, J., Potter, R. D., and Kuehl, H.: Synthetic Seismic Data for Training Deep Learning Networks, Interpretation, 10, SE31--SE39, doi:10.1190/INT-2021-0193.1, 2022

    2021 doi

  32. [40]

    Michelini, A., Cianetti, S., Gaviano, S., Giunchi, C., Jozinovi \'c , D., and Lauciani, V.: INSTANCE -- the Italian Seismic Dataset for Machine Learning, Earth System Science Data, 13, 5509--5544, doi:10.5194/essd-13-5509-2021, 2021

    2021 doi

  33. [41]

    M., Sheng, Y., Zhu, W., and Beroza, G

    Mousavi, S. M., Sheng, Y., Zhu, W., and Beroza, G. C.: STanford EArthquake Dataset ( STEAD ): A Global Data Set of Seismic Signals for AI , IEEE Access, 7, 179\,464--179\,476, doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2947848, 2019

    2019

  34. [42]

    B., Miller, R

    Park, C. B., Miller, R. D., and Xia, J.: Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves, GEOPHYSICS, 64, 800--808, doi:10.1190/1.1444590, 1999

    1999 doi

  35. [43]

    E., Masters, T

    Pasyanos, M. E., Masters, T. G., Laske, G., and Ma, Z.: LITHO1 .0: An Updated Crust and Lithospheric Model of the Earth , Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 119, 2153--2173, doi:10.1002/2013JB010626, 2014

    2014 doi

  36. [44]

    17--26, doi:10.5382/SEGnews.2025-140.fea-01, 2025

    Reid, A., Olivier, G., and Jones, T.: Ambient Noise Tomography : A Sensitive , Rapid , Passive Seismic Technique for Mineral Exploration , SEG Discovery, pp. 17--26, doi:10.5382/SEGnews.2025-140.fea-01, 2025

    2025 doi

  37. [45]

    Rickers, F., Fichtner, A., and Trampert, J.: The Iceland --Jan Mayen Plume System and Its Impact on Mantle Dynamics in the North Atlantic Region: Evidence from Full-Waveform Inversion, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 367, 39--51, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2013.02.022, 2013

    2013 doi

  38. [46]

    Shapiro, N. M. and Campillo, M.: Emergence of Broadband Rayleigh Waves from Correlations of the Ambient Seismic Noise, Geophysical Research Letters, 31, 2004GL019\,491, doi:10.1029/2004GL019491, 2004

    2004 doi

  39. [47]

    Shapiro, N. M. and Ritzwoller, M. H.: Monte- Carlo Inversion for a Global Shear-Velocity Model of the Crust and Upper Mantle, Geophysical Journal International, 151, 88--105, doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2002.01742.x, 2002

    2002 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Shen, W., Ritzwoller, M. H., and Schulte-Pelkum, V.: A 3- D Model of the Crust and Uppermost Mantle beneath the Central and Western US by Joint Inversion of Receiver Functions and Surface Wave Dispersion, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 118, 262--276, doi:10.1029...

    2013 doi

  41. [49]

    Shen, W., Ritzwoller, M. H., Kang, D., Kim, Y., Lin, F.-C., Ning, J., Wang, W., Zheng, Y., and Zhou, L.: A Seismic Reference Model for the Crust and Uppermost Mantle beneath China from Surface Wave Dispersion, Geophysical Journal International, 206, 954--979, doi:10.1093/gji/g...

    2016 doi

  42. [50]

    Simut \.e , S., Steptoe, H., Cobden, L., Gokhberg, A., and Fichtner, A.: Full-waveform Inversion of the Japanese Islands Region, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 121, 3722--3741, doi:10.1002/2016jb012802, 2016

    2016 doi

  43. [52]

    Taufik, M. H., Wang, F., and Alkhalifah, T.: Learned Regularizations for Multi - Parameter Elastic Full Waveform Inversion Using Diffusion Models , Journal of Geophysical Research: Machine Learning and Computation, 1, e2024JH000\,125, doi:10.1029/2024JH000125, 2024

    2024 doi

  44. [53]

    T.: Transmission of Elastic Waves through a Stratified Solid Medium, Journal of Applied Physics, 21, 89--93, doi:10.1063/1.1699629, 1950

    Thomson, W. T.: Transmission of Elastic Waves through a Stratified Solid Medium, Journal of Applied Physics, 21, 89--93, doi:10.1063/1.1699629, 1950

    1950 doi

  45. [54]

    Wang, F., Song, X., and Li, J.: Deep Learning - Based H - Method ( HkNet ) for Estimating Crustal Thickness and Vp / Vs Ratio From Receiver Functions , Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127, e2022JB023\,944, doi:10.1029/2022JB023944, 2022

    2022 doi

  46. [55]

    Wang, F., Huang, X., and Alkhalifah, T. A.: A Prior Regularized Full Waveform Inversion Using Generative Diffusion Models , IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61, 1--11, doi:10.1109/tgrs.2023.3337014, 2023 a

    2023

  47. [56]

    Wang, F., Song, X., and Li, M.: A Deep-Learning-Based Approach for Seismic Surface-Wave Dispersion Inversion ( SfNet ) with Application to the Chinese Mainland, Earthquake Science, 36, 147--168, doi:10.1016/j.eqs.2023.02.007, 2023 b

    2023 doi

  48. [57]

    Wang, G., Wu, X., and Zhang, W.: cigChannel : A Large-Scale 3D Seismic Dataset with Labeled Paleochannels for Advancing Deep Learning in Seismic Interpretation, Earth System Science Data, 17, 3447--3471, doi:10.5194/essd-17-3447-2025, 2025

    2025 doi

  49. [58]

    Wathelet, M., Jongmans, D., and Ohrnberger, M.: Surface-wave Inversion Using a Direct Search Algorithm and Its Application to Ambient Vibration Measurements, Near Surface Geophysics, 2, 211--221, doi:10.3997/1873-0604.2004018, 2004

    2004

  50. [59]

    Wen, L., Yu, S., Department of Geosciences, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA , Laboratory of Seismology and Physics of Earth's Interior; School of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, Chin...

    2023 doi

  51. [60]

    D., and Park, C

    Xia, J., Miller, R. D., and Park, C. B.: Estimation of Near-surface Shear-wave Velocity by Inversion of Rayleigh Waves, GEOPHYSICS, 64, 691--700, doi:10.1190/1.1444578, 1999

    1999 doi

  52. [61]

    Xiao, X., Cheng, S., Wu, J., Wang, W., Sun, L., Wang, X., Ma, J., Tong, Y., Liang, X., Tian, X., Li, H., Chen, Q.-F., Yu, S., and Wen, L.: CSRM -1.0: A China Seismological Reference Model , Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 129, e2024JB029\,520, doi:10.1029/2024JB0...

    2024 doi

  53. [62]

    Xie, J., Chu, R., and Yang, Y.: 3- D Upper-Mantle Shear Velocity Model beneath the Contiguous United States Based on Broadband Surface Wave from Ambient Seismic Noise, Pure and Applied Geophysics, 175, 3403--3418, doi:10.1007/s00024-018-1881-2, 2018

    2018 doi

  54. [63]

    Xin, H., Zhang, H., Kang, M., He, R., Gao, L., and Gao, J.: High-resolution Lithospheric Velocity Structure of Continental China by Double-difference Seismic Travel-time Tomography, Seismological Research Letters, 90, 229--241, doi:10.1785/0220180209, 2019

    2019 doi

  55. [64]

    Yablokov, A., Lugovtsova, Y., and Serdyukov, A.: Uncertainty Quantification of Multimodal Surface Wave Inversion Using Artificial Neural Networks, GEOPHYSICS, 88, KS1--KS11, doi:10.1190/geo2022-0261.1, 2023

    2023 doi

  56. [65]

    V., Serdyukov, A

    Yablokov, A. V., Serdyukov, A. S., Loginov, G. N., and Baranov, V. D.: An Artificial Neural Network Approach for the Inversion of Surface Wave Dispersion Curves, Geophysical Prospecting, 69, 1405--1432, doi:10.1111/1365-2478.13107, 2021

    2021

  57. [66]

    and Ritzwoller, M

    Yang, Y. and Ritzwoller, M. H.: Characteristics of Ambient Seismic Noise as a Source for Surface Wave Tomography, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 9, 2007GC001\,814, doi:10.1029/2007GC001814, 2008

    2008 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.