![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() | Kinematics in iterated correlations of a passive acoustic experiment | ![]() |
![]() |
geomC4
Figure 6. Experiment geometry for the evaluation of ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
---|---|
![]() ![]() |
The contribution of each term is labeled according to the numbering of equation 15. We sum
over the auxiliary stations, according to equation 18, to obtain the retrieved signal in Figure 8(b). We compare this signal to the true result, convolved with the square of the autocorrelation of the wavelet
, and the result retrieved by correlating stations
and
directly (
) weighted by
. It is clear that the dominant contribution in
, without muting
and
, does not correspond to the direct event between the stations
and
. If we assume we can perfectly mute only the dominant term 4.1 from
and
, this would leave the terms of group 2.
A correlogram of their contributions to
is shown in Figure 9(a), summing this panel and multiplying with a phase-modifying according to equation 18, leads to the signal in Figure 9(b). We now see that there is a dominant term coinciding with the causal direct event between stations
and
in the true result; this event comes from term 15.11.
![]() ![]() |
---|
corrC2a,corrC2b
Figure 7. a) Correlogram for correlations between station ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|
corrC4ABa,resultC4a
Figure 8. a) Correlogram of ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|
corrC4ABb,resultC4b
Figure 9. a) Comparison of reconstructed Green's function with the true result, after summation of all 11 terms of groups 1 and 2 over auxiliary station. b) Comparison of reconstructed Green's function with true result, after summation of 4 terms of group 2 over auxiliary station. ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() | Kinematics in iterated correlations of a passive acoustic experiment | ![]() |
![]() |