Applied Geophysics

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 301–313 | Cite as

Improved preconditioned conjugate gradient algorithm and application in 3D inversion of gravity-gradiometry data

  • Tai-Han Wang
  • Da-Nian Huang
  • Guo-Qing Ma
  • Zhao-Hai Meng
  • Ye Li


With the continuous development of full tensor gradiometer (FTG) measurement techniques, three-dimensional (3D) inversion of FTG data is becoming increasingly used in oil and gas exploration. In the fast processing and interpretation of large-scale high-precision data, the use of the graphics processing unit process unit (GPU) and preconditioning methods are very important in the data inversion. In this paper, an improved preconditioned conjugate gradient algorithm is proposed by combining the symmetric successive over-relaxation (SSOR) technique and the incomplete Choleksy decomposition conjugate gradient algorithm (ICCG). Since preparing the preconditioner requires extra time, a parallel implement based on GPU is proposed. The improved method is then applied in the inversion of noisecontaminated synthetic data to prove its adaptability in the inversion of 3D FTG data. Results show that the parallel SSOR-ICCG algorithm based on NVIDIA Tesla C2050 GPU achieves a speedup of approximately 25 times that of a serial program using a 2.0 GHz Central Processing Unit (CPU). Real airborne gravity-gradiometry data from Vinton salt dome (southwest Louisiana, USA) are also considered. Good results are obtained, which verifies the efficiency and feasibility of the proposed parallel method in fast inversion of 3D FTG data.


Full Tensor Gravity Gradiometry (FTG) ICCG method conjugate gradient algorithm gravity-gradiometry data inversion CPU and GPU 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The authors would like to thank Bell Geospace Inc. for providing FTG data from the Vinton salt dome. We also thank the reviewers for their detailed comments and suggestions, which helped to improve the paper.


  1. Bell, R. E., Anderson, R., and Pratson, L., 1997, Gravity gradiometry resurfaces: Leading Edge, 16(1), 55–59.Google Scholar
  2. Blakely, R. J., 1995, Potential Theory in Gravity and Magnetic Applications: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boulanger, O., and Chouteau, M., 2001, Constraints in 3d gravity inversion: Geophysical Prospecting, 49(2), 265–280.Google Scholar
  4. Canning, F. X., and Scholl, J. F., 1996, Diagonal preconditioners for the EFIE using a wavelet basis: IEEE Transactions on Antennas & Propagation, 44(9), 1239–1246.Google Scholar
  5. Cella, F., and Fedi, M., 2011, Inversion of potential field data using the structural index as weighting function rate decay: Geophysical Prospecting, 60(2), 313–336.Google Scholar
  6. Chen, R. S., Yung, E. K. N., Chan, C. H., and Fang, D. G., 2000, Application of preconditioned CG–FFT technique to method of lines for analysis of the infinite-plane metallic grating: Microwave & Optical Technology Letters, 24(3), 170–175.Google Scholar
  7. Chen, R. S., Yung, K. N., Chan, C. H., Wang, D. X., and Fang, D. G., 2002, Application of the SSOR preconditioned CG algorithm to the vector fem for 3D full-wave analysis of electromagnetic-field boundaryvalue problems: IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory & Techniques, 50(4), 1165–1172.Google Scholar
  8. Chen, Z., Meng, X., Guo, L., and Liu, G., 2012, GICUDA: a parallel program for 3D correlation imaging of large scale gravity and gravity gradiometry data on graphics processing units with CUDA: Computers & Geosciences, 46(3), 119–128.Google Scholar
  9. Coker, M. O., Bhattacharya, J. P., and Marfurt, K. J., 2007, Fracture patterns within mudstones on the flanks of a salt dome: Syneresis or slumping?: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Transactions, 57 125–137.Google Scholar
  10. Cuma, M., and Zhdanov, M. S., 2014, Massively parallel regularized 3D inversion of potential fields on CPUs and GPUs: Computers & Geosciences, 62(1), 80–87.Google Scholar
  11. Ennen, C., and Hall, S., 2011, Structural mapping of the Vinton salt dome, Louisiana, using gravity gradiometry data: 81st Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 30(1), 830–835.Google Scholar
  12. Forsberg R., 1984, A study of terrain reductions, density an omalies and geophysical inversion methods in gravity field modelling: Report 355, Department of Geodetic Scien ce and Surveying, Ohio State University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Geng, M., Huang, D., Yang, Q., and Liu, Y., 2014, 3D inversion of airborne gravity-gradiometry data using cokriging: Geophysics, 79(4), G37–G47.Google Scholar
  14. Golub, G. H., and Van Loan, C. F. 1996, Matrix computations (3rd edition.): Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, America.Google Scholar
  15. Haáz, I. B., 1953, Relationship between the potential of the attraction of the mass contained in a finite rectangular prism and its first and second derivatives: Geophysical Transactions, II, 57–66Google Scholar
  16. Hou, Z. L., Wei, X. H., Huang D. N., et al., 2015, Full tensor gravity gradiometry data inversion: performance analysis of parallel computing algorithms: Applied Geophysics, 12(3), 292–302Google Scholar
  17. Li X., and Chouteau M., 1998, Three-dimensional gravity modelling in all space: Survey in Geophysics, 19(4), 339–368.Google Scholar
  18. Li, Y., and Oldenburg, D. W., 1996, 3-D inversion of magnetic data: Geophysics, 61(2), 394–408.Google Scholar
  19. Li, Y., and Oldenburg, D. W., 1998, 3-d inversion of gravity data: Geophysics, 63(1), 109–119.Google Scholar
  20. Liu, G., Meng, X., and Chen, Z., 2012, 3D magnetic inversion based on probability tomography and its GPU implement: Computers & Geosciences, 48(9), 86–92.Google Scholar
  21. Liu, W., 2012, Parallel program design of Matlab: Beihang University Press, Beijing.Google Scholar
  22. Moorkamp, M., Jegen, M., Roberts, A., and Hobbs, R., 2010, Massively parallel forward modeling of scalar and tensor gravimetry data: Computers & Geosciences, 36(5), 680–686.Google Scholar
  23. NVIDIA, 2007, NIVIDIA CUDA compute unified device architecture programming guide. Santa Clara, CA.Google Scholar
  24. Oliveira Jr, V. C., and Barbosa, C. F., 2013, 3-D radial gravity gradient inversion: Geophysical Journal International, 195(2), 883–902.Google Scholar
  25. Pilkington, M., 1997, 3-D magnetic imaging using conjugate gradients: Geophysics, 62 1132–1142.Google Scholar
  26. Portniaguine, O., and Zhdanov, M. S., 2002, 3-D magnetic inversion with data compression and image focusing: Geophysics, 67(5), 1532–1541.Google Scholar
  27. Sajo-Castelli A M, Fortes M A., and Raydan M., 2014, Preconditioned conjugate gradient method for finding minimal energy surfaces on Powell–Sabin triangulations. Journal of Computational & Applied Mathematics, 268(1), 34–55.Google Scholar
  28. Qin, P., Huang, D., Yuan, Y., Geng, M., and Liu, J., 2016, Integrated gravity and gravity gradient 3d inversion using the non-linear conjugate gradient: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 126 52–73.Google Scholar
  29. Shamsipour, P., Marcotte, D., Chouteau, M., and Keating, P., 2010, 3D stochastic inversion of gravity data using cokriging and cosimulation: Geophysics, 75(1), I1–I10.Google Scholar
  30. Smith, G. D., 1985, Numerical solution of partial differential equations: finite difference methods: Oxford University Press, England.Google Scholar
  31. Szymczyk, M., and Szymczyk, P., 2012, Matlab and parallel computing: Image Processing & Communications, 17(4), 207–216.Google Scholar
  32. Thompson, S. A., and Eichelberger, O. H., 1928, Vinton salt dome, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana: AAPG Bulletin, 12 385–394.Google Scholar
  33. Tontini, C. F., Cocchi, L., and Carmisciano, C., 2006, Depth-to-the-bottom optimization for magnetic data inversion: magnetic structure of the latium volcanic region, Italy: Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, 111(B11), 220–222.Google Scholar
  34. Zhang, S., 2009, GPU high performance computing of CUDA: China Water & Power Press, Beijing.Google Scholar
  35. Zhdanov, M. S., 2002, Geophysical inverse theory and regularization problems: Elsevier, Salt Lake City, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Editorial Office of Applied Geophysics and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tai-Han Wang
    • 1
  • Da-Nian Huang
    • 1
  • Guo-Qing Ma
    • 1
  • Zhao-Hai Meng
    • 2
  • Ye Li
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Geo-Exploration Science and TechnologyJilin UniversityChangchunChina
  2. 2.Tianjin Navigation Instrument Research InstituteTianjinChina
  3. 3.Jilin Provincial Electric Power Survey and Design InstituteChangchunChina

Personalised recommendations