Technical Report on Waveform Fit Metrics for Global Models
The new WAVEFORMS Initiative in the Ground-based Nuclear Detonation Detection (GNDD) program includes an increased emphasis on the development of Earth models and methods to predict entire seismic and acoustic waveforms more accurately. In general, this increased emphasis is predicated on the need to better characterize seismic events and provide improved model-based discrimination between event types including earthquakes and explosions. More specifically, while current moment tensor inversion methods tend to work well for larger events (M>~4) using tuned 1-D Earth models, the development of state-of-the-art 3-D models and methods is required for the prediction of shorter period waves over large areas for discrimination of smaller events. There is no standard metric for model-based waveform prediction accuracy used in the waveform modeling/inversion community. However, there are several popular waveform misfit definitions; and minimizing the corresponding objective functions is the goal of waveform inversion. Some example misfit definitions employed for adjoint waveform tomography include measures of simple travel time differences (e.g. Tape et al., 2010), cross-correlation travel time differences (e.g. Luo and Schuster, 1991), multi-taper frequency dependent methods (e.g. Lei et al., 2020), time-frequency phase misfit functions (e.g. Fichtner 2010; Rodgers et al., 2022), normalized cross-correlation methods (e.g. Tao et al., 2018), and others. In some cases, these misfit definitions also involve complicated weighting schemes and summations over multiple frequency bands making it difficult to duplicate the misfit measurement with alternative models and datasets. Although each of the misfit definitions mentioned above are useful for developing waveform models, the actual misfit values are not usually meaningful outside of a given project, model, and/or dataset. Therefore, it is difficult to understand and communicate model performance for predicting waveforms and comparing to other models and/or new model iterations with a different dataset. Therefore, there is a need for a generalized method for evaluating overall model performance that is independent from the specific misfit chosen to develop the waveform models that is also intuitive and meaningful. In this report, we describe a new metric we refer to as ‘Percent of Correlated Signal’. The following sections describe and demonstrate the metric with a case study event and a more rigorous test using a random selection of globally distributed events. While the focus here is on global tomography models, the metric is meant to applicable to regional ‘wiggle-for-wiggle’ waveform models/studies as well.