[CIG-SEISMO] SPECFEM3D

[James A. Smith]

Hi Dylan,

I have tested PML for the adjoint simulation. It seems to work, although I am still playing with getting higher quality inversion results (as compared to Stacey). Please see this issue: https://github.com/geodynamics/specfem3d/issues/312

You will need to enable UNDO_ATTENUATION for PML to work in this case (in setup/constanst.h). You will also have to comment out the lines in the source code that stop the code if PML is turned on for an adjoint simulation and recompile. I hope it works for you.

Best,
James

________________________________
From: CIG-SEISMO [cig-seismo-bounces at geodynamics.org] on behalf of Dylan Mikesell [dylanmikesell at boisestate.edu]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 2:17 PM
To: cig-seismo at geodynamics.org
Subject: [CIG-SEISMO] SPECFEM3D

Hi SPECFEM developers,

Is anyone currently working on the PML implementation for the adjoint. A student and I are working on an adjoint tomography and planning to use SPECFEM3D. We tried to save the forward simulations today and got the following.

STOP PML_CONDITIONS is still under test for adjoint simulation

I checked the devel branch and this is still there. Is anyone actively working on this topic? It would be nice to get the PML going with the adjoint.

Best wishes,

Dylan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.geodynamics.org/pipermail/cig-seismo/attachments/20171030/fcbf4155/attachment.html>