There is a literal domain error in the printed formula. A semivariogram indexed by a signed displacement must satisfy , since reversing the two observations leaves the squared increment unchanged. For positive or , the displayed positive-lag value is nonzero whereas the displayed negative-lag value is zero. Thus the claim on all of is false as written.
Interpret the argument as a nonnegative distance, or use the even extension of the Gaussian semivariogram. For and , the intended model is
It admits the covariogram
The Gaussian kernel is a positive-definite kernel, as can be seen from the Fourier transform of a Gaussian: in one dimension
and the nonnegative spectral density makes every finite covariance quadratic form nonnegative. In higher dimensions use the product Gaussian density. Adding independent Gaussian white noise of variance adds the diagonal nugget covariance. Thus a zero-mean stationary Gaussian random field exists with this covariance, and gives the corrected semivariogram.
For nonzero structured variance, the nugget effect is the right limit at zero, the sill of a semivariogram is , and the range of a semivariogram is infinite if defined as the distance at which the sill is exactly reached. A 95-percent practical range solves :
The scale is sometimes called the range parameter; it is neither the exact range nor the 95-percent practical range. If , there is no nontrivial structured range.
The fact that a semivariogram does not determine stationarity is a further distinction: a semivariogram specifies increment variation, not a unique process or absolute covariance. Adding an independent random constant adds a constant to without changing . More strongly, subtracting from a stationary field preserves its semivariogram but generally makes its variance depend on . The corrected statement is that this semivariogram admits a second-order stationary model, with the displayed covariance using the usual convention at large distance; it does not force every compatible process to be stationary.
Use the time-harmonic wave convention and write , , with a deterministic incident wave envelope. The printed speed ratio is inconsistent with : the refractive index used below is . Substituting in the Helmholtz equation gives
The paraxial approximation discards . The usual weak-fluctuation model also linearizes , giving
Dropping the quadratic contrast is an additional weak-fluctuation assumption, not a consequence of small propagation angles. Although the linearized random potential generates attenuation of order , it does not retain every effect of that order in the literal finite-correlation index: the discarded quadratic contrast can also produce a mean wave phase shift. This linearization must precede a Gaussian white noise limit: the square of ideal white noise has no ordinary pointwise meaning.
The split-step Fourier method alternates free-space diffraction, , with a random phase screen,
For jointly Gaussian random fields, Gaussian phase averaging gives . More generally, a product of fields and conjugate fields picks up , with signs or . Its screen average is determined entirely by the wave phase covariance matrix. The deterministic diffraction step acts on each coordinate, with opposite signs on factors formed by complex conjugation. This is the basis of the field-moment equations.
There is an important closure qualification. A stationary Gaussian random field need not have independent longitudinal increments. For finite-correlation fluctuations, the unlinearized parabolic wave equation instead gives
In the weak-fluctuation model, the exact first-moment equation is
The last term cannot in general be replaced by a constant times . An exact generic solution of the linearized model is
where denotes time ordering of the propagation operators. For the unlinearized model, add inside the propagation generator. The covariance function of the medium is needed to evaluate this expression; One-point Gaussian distributions alone would not even determine the joint wave phase statistics.
For example, omit diffraction and take a longitudinal autocovariance function . Direct Gaussian phase averaging gives
Even here, unit-variance stationary Gaussian random fields with different give different answers. In the general problem the diffraction and multiplication operators do not commute, so this scalar attenuation cannot simply be multiplied by without an additional approximation.
The standard closed answer uses the Markov approximation for a random medium, made explicit in part ii. Let the longitudinally integrated covariance kernel be
Replace the medium by longitudinal Gaussian white noise with this strength. A screen of thickness then has and is independent of the incoming field. For the moment , expanding both steps to order gives
In particular, the coherent attenuation in a white-noise random medium and its Fresnel propagator solution are
Equivalently, write , where is Brownian motion in with transverse covariance kernel . The Stratonovich integral formulation is . Its Itô integral form is
The mean of the Itô integral vanishes, independently confirming the attenuation drift. For in two transverse dimensions,
Thus a unit plane wave has . For a general incident wave envelope, the Fresnel propagator supplies its spreading. The attenuation is redistribution between the coherent and diffuse wave fields, rather than wave absorption: for a field and its conjugate at the same point, the screen contribution in the second-moment equation cancels.
Use the leading far-field kernel from the previous part. Define
Then and, because the incident intensity is one,
To first order in weak contrast, . Its linearized part is a centered stationary Gaussian random field, with autocorrelation function of a random field . The exponential moment of a Gaussian linear functional therefore gives the usual Gaussian intensity in the first Rytov approximation:
Equivalently the exponent is . The second term generally matters because a finite real random medium need not generate a circular complex Gaussian amplitude.
If the full stated potential is retained, it is not Gaussian and has mean . To retain every term through order in the intensity of this first Rytov field, the cumulant expansion instead gives
Here ; the raw autocorrelation differs by . The stated remainder uses Gaussian finite-dimensional statistics of , for which odd total moments vanish. This mean term is absent if one first truncates the potential to . Both formulas concern the first Rytov approximation, and exponentiating it does not supply the omitted higher-order scattering corrections.
To first order in the weak fluctuation, , so
For
introduce the signs . The product rule gives
Assume that is a zero-mean stationary Gaussian random field, that its longitudinal correlation length is short compared with the envelope's evolution scale, and that the propagation distance is long compared with that correlation length. The forward Markov approximation then neglects diffraction during one correlation length. Applying the Furutsu–Novikov formula closes the last average at second order in . Define the integrated longitudinal autocorrelation function of a random field
Then
where
Writing and using the evenness of the covariance gives the equivalent expression
The derivation also assumes paraxial propagation, weak scattering, sufficient regularity to interchange differentiation and expectation, and statistical homogeneity in both coordinates. Without the short-correlation approximation, the Gaussian identity produces a nonlocal longitudinal memory integral rather than this local closed equation.
Since with small variance,
To leading order, is therefore a centered stationary Gaussian random field. Let its autocorrelation function of a random field be
The contribution gives higher-order mean and non-Gaussian corrections and is consistently omitted at this order.
The far-field Rytov approximation from part ii has unit incident intensity and
The real random variable is centered Gaussian. Its moment-generating function gives
Define
Then
and hence
This expression depends only on the two-point autocorrelation of the scattering potential. In the weak-fluctuation expansion it becomes