1887
Volume 22, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

Abstract

Waveform inversion is theoretically a powerful tool to reconstruct subsurface structures, but a usually encountered problem is that accurate sources are very rare, causing the computation to be unstable or divergent. This challenging practical problem, although sometimes ignored and even imperceptible, can easily create discrepancies in calculated shot gathers, which will then lead to wrong residuals that will be smeared back to the gradients, hence jeopardizing the inverted tomograms. For any real dataset, every shot gather corresponds to its unique source even if some gathers can be transformed alike after data processing. To resolve this problem, we propose a collocated inversion of sources and early arrival waveforms with the two submodules executing successively. Not only can this method reconstruct a decent source wavelet that approaches the ground truth, but also it can produce credible background tomograms with optimized sources. Part of the cycle skipping problems can also be mitigated because it avoids the trial and error experiments on various sources. Numerical tests on a synthetic and a land dataset validate the effectiveness of this method. Restrictions on initial sources or starting velocity models will be relaxed, and this method can be extended to any other applications for engineering or exploration purposes.

© 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12312
2024-07-21
2026-02-06

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12312
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abubakar, A., Hu, W., Van Den Berg, P. & Habashy, T. (2008) A finite‐difference contrast source inversion method. Inverse Problems, 24(6), 065004.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alewine, R.W., III. (1974) Application of linear inversion theory toward the estimation of seismic source parameters. Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Artman, B., Podladtchikov, I. & Witten, B. (2010) Source location using time‐reverse imaging. Geophysical Prospecting, 58(5), 861–873.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Baysal, E., Kosloff, D.D. & Sherwood, J.W. (1983) Reverse time migration. Geophysics, 48(11), 1514–1524.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Borisov, D., Ivanov, J., Peterie, S.L. & Miller, R.D. (2020) Full‐waveform inversion with alternating source and model update for shallow seismic. In SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting (pp. 1860–1864). Houston, TX: SEG.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bormann, P., Wendt, S. & DiGiacomo, D. (2013) Seismic sources and source parameters. In New manual of seismological observatory practice 2 (NMSOP2) (pp. 1–259). Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Dai, W., Wang, X. & Schuster, G.T. (2011) Least‐squares migration of multisource data with a deblurring filter. Geophysics, 76(5), R135–R146.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Deng, C., Feng, S., Wang, H., Zhang, X., Jin, P., Feng, Y., Zeng, Q., Chen, Y., & Lin, Y. (2022) OpenFWI: large‐scale multi‐structural benchmark datasets for full waveform inversion. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35, 6007–6020.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Fink, M. (2006) Time‐reversal acoustics in complex environments. Geophysics, 71(4), SI151–SI164.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Fukahata, Y., Yagi, Y. & Matsu'ura, M. (2003) Waveform inversion for seismic source processes using ABIC with two sorts of prior constraints: comparison between proper and improper formulations. Geophysical Research Letters, 30(6), 1305.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gajewski, D. & Tessmer, E. (2005) Reverse modelling for seismic event characterization. Geophysical Journal International, 163(1), 276–284.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Huang, G., Nammour, R. & Symes, W.W. (2018) Source‐independent extended waveform inversion based on space‐time source extension: frequency‐domain implementation. Geophysics, 83(5), R449–R461.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Lamuraglia, S., Stucchi, E. & Aleardi, M. (2023) Application of a global–local full‐waveform inversion of Rayleigh wave to estimate the near‐surface shear wave velocity model. Near Surface Geophysics, 21(1), 21–38.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Lee, K.H. & Kim, H.J. (2003) Source‐independent full‐waveform inversion of seismic data. Geophysics, 68(6), 2010–2015.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Liu, Y., Du, Y. & Luo, Y. (2021) Sparsity‐promoting least‐squares interferometric migration for high‐resolution passive source location. Geophysics, 86(1), KS1–KS9.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Nocedal, J. & Wright, S. (2006) Numerical optimization. Springer Science & Business Media.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Schuster, G.T. (2017) Seismic inversion. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Sheng, J., Leeds, A., Buddensiek, M. & Schuster, G.T. (2006) Early arrival waveform tomography on near‐surface refraction data. Geophysics, 71(4), U47–U57.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Song, Z.‐M., Williamson, P.R. & Pratt, R.G. (1995) Frequency‐domain acoustic‐wave modeling and inversion of crosshole data: part ii, inversion method, synthetic experiments and real‐data results. Geophysics, 60(3), 796–809.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Sun, D., Jiao, K., Vigh, D. & Coates, R. (2014) Source wavelet estimation in full waveform inversion. In: 76th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2014, volume 2014. Houten, the Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1–5.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Sun, J., Innanen, K.A. & Huang, C. (2021) Physics‐guided deep learning for seismic inversion with hybrid training and uncertainty analysis. Geophysics, 86(3), R303–R317.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Sun, J., Xue, Z., Zhu, T., Fomel, S. & Nakata, N. (2016) Full‐waveform inversion of passive seismic data for sources and velocities. In: 2016 SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1405–1410.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Symes, W.W. (2022) Error bounds for extended source inversion applied to an acoustic transmission inverse problem. Inverse Problems, 38(11), 115002.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Symes, W.W., Chen, H. & Minkoff, S.E. (2020) Full‐waveform inversion by source extension: why it works. In: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2020. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 765–769.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Tarantola, A. (1984) Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation. Geophysics, 49(8), 1259–1266.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Valentine, A.P. & Woodhouse, J.H. (2010) Reducing errors in seismic tomography: combined inversion for sources and structure. Geophysical Journal International, 180(2), 847–857.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Van Den Berg, P.M. & Kleinman, R.E. (1997) A contrast source inversion method. Inverse Problems, 13(6), 1607.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Van Leeuwen, T. & Herrmann, F.J. (2013) Mitigating local minima in full‐waveform inversion by expanding the search space. Geophysical Journal International, 195(1), 661–667.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Virieux, J. & Operto, S. (2009) An overview of full‐waveform inversion in exploration geophysics. Geophysics, 74(6), WCC1–WCC26.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Wang, K., Krebs, J.R., Hinkley, D. & Baumstein, A. (2009) Simultaneous full‐waveform inversion for source wavelet and earth model. In: SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2537–2541.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Yagi, Y. & Fukahata, Y. (2011) Introduction of uncertainty of Green's function into waveform inversion for seismic source processes. Geophysical Journal International, 186(2), 711–720.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Yilmaz, Ö. (2001) Seismic data analysis: Processing, inversion, and interpretation of seismic data. Tulsa, OK: Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Yu, H., Zhang, D. & Huang, Y. (2017) Application of early arrival waveform inversion with pseudo‐deconvolution misfit function by source convolution. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 25(1), 57–72.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Zhong, Y. & Liu, Y. (2019) Source‐independent time‐domain vector‐acoustic full‐waveform inversion. Geophysics, 84(4), R489–R505.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhu, L. & Ben‐Zion, Y. (2013) Parametrization of general seismic potency and moment tensors for source inversion of seismic waveform data. Geophysical Journal International, 194(2), 839–843.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Zhu, T. (2014) Time‐reverse modelling of acoustic wave propagation in attenuating media. Geophysical Journal International, 197(1), 483–494.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12312
Loading
A collocated inversion of sources and early arrival waveforms for credible tomograms: Synthetic and field data examples
Near Surface Geophysics 22, 453 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12312
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12312
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12312
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): inversion; near‐surface; refraction; velocity

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error