The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Monte Carlo sampling of solutions to inverse problems
Abstract
Probabilistic formulation of inverse problems leads to the definition of a probability distribution in the model space. This probability distribution combines a priori information with new information obtained by measuring some observable parameters (data). As, in the general case, the theory linking data with model parameters is nonlinear, the a posteriori probability in the model space may not be easy to describe (it may be multimodal, some moments may not be defined, etc.). When analysing an inverse problem, obtaining a maximum likelihood model is usually not sufficient, as we normally also wish to have information on the resolution power of the data. In the general case we may have a large number of model parameters, and an inspection of the marginal probability densities of interest may be impractical, or even useless. But it is possible to pseudorandomly generate a large collection of models according to the posterior probability distribution and to analyse and display the models in such a way that information on the relative likelihoods of model properties is conveyed to the spectator. This can be accomplished by means of an efficient Monte Carlo method, even in cases where no explicit formula for the a priori distribution is available. The most well known importance sampling method, the Metropolis algorithm, can be generalized, and this gives a method that allows analysis of (possibly highly nonlinear) inverse problems with complex a priori information and data with an arbitrary noise distribution.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines
Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A. W., Rosenbluth, M. N., Teller, A. H., & Teller, E. (1953) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.1699114 · Cited by 37,192
Metropolis, N., & Ulam, S. (1949) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1949.10483310 · Cited by 6,474
Cited by
Past Temperatures Directly from the Greenland Ice Sheet
Dahl-Jensen, D., Mosegaard, K., Gundestrup, N., Clow, G. D., Johnsen, S. J., Hansen, A. W., & Balling, N. (1998) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.282.5387.268 · Cited by 1,049
Self-citationDealing with uncertainty in model updating for damage assessment: a review
Simoen, E., De Roeck, G., & Lombaert, G. (2015) · Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing · doi:10.1016/j.ymssp.2014.11.001 · Cited by 540
Parsimonious Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo inversion in a nonlinear geophysical problem
Malinverno, A. (2002) · Geophysical Journal International · doi:10.1046/j.1365-246x.2002.01847.x · Cited by 470
Transdimensional inversion of receiver functions and surface wave dispersion
Bodin, T., Sambridge, M., Gallagher, K., & Rawlinson, N. (2012) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth · doi:10.1029/2011jb008560 · Cited by 462
Shen, W., Ritzwoller, M. H., Kang, D., Kim, Y., Lin, F.-C., Ning, J., Wang, W., Zheng, Y., & Zhou, L. (2016) · Geophysical Journal International · doi:10.1093/gji/ggw175 · Cited by 382
Metadata
- Authors
- Mosegaard, K., & Tarantola, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1995-07-10
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- B7
- Pages
- 12431-12447
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2098550720
- Cited by
- 1,342
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Monte Carlo sampling of solutions to inverse problems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/94jb03097
- The paper
- Mosegaard, K., & Tarantola, A. (1995). Monte Carlo sampling of solutions to inverse problems. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. https://doi.org/10.1029/94jb03097
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.