1887
2nd Australasian Exploration Geoscience Conference: Data to Discovery
  • ISSN: 2202-0586
  • E-ISSN:

Abstract

Summary

Seismic data processing and analysis focuses on identifying the arrival of seismic waves or ‘first-breaks’. The identification of the arrival of first breaks is complicated by the variance of recording quality typically found across the dataset. In an exploration setting, models need to be developed and refined multiple times. Picking these first breaks then becomes time consuming, limiting the interpreter to processing their dataset rather than considering the implications of their model. Machine Learning as a field continues to respond to many data centric issues within geoscience. However, the field as a whole continues to grapple with balancing the power of these new techniques against operator expertise and skill.

This paper presents a methodology to identify the first break in seismic refraction data using a Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM) network, which is a recurrent network architecture. I propose one way to delineate between different groups of traces that the operator would intuitively pick differently, by using dynamic time warping to generate a distance matrix of the seismic traces for clustering. This clustering of trace types allows for a more targeted selection of training samples. I conclude with a proposed framework for the integration of operator skill with machine learning speed and repeatability.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1080/22020586.2019.12072973
2019-12-01
2026-01-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Asim, K. M., Idris, A., Iqbal, T. and Martinez-Álvarez, F. (2018) ‘Seismic indicators based earthquake predictor system using Genetic Programming and AdaBoost classification’, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. Elsevier Ltd, 111(April), pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.04.020.
  2. Boschetti, F., Dentith, M. D. and List, R. D. (1996) ‘A fractalbased algorithm for detecting first arrivals on seismic traces’, Geophysics, 61(4), pp. 1095–1102. doi: 10.1190/1.1444030.
  3. Chu, C. K. P. and Mendel, J. M. (1994) ‘First Break Refraction Event Picking Using Fuzzy Logic Systems’, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2(4), pp. 255–266. doi: 10.1109/91.324805.
  4. Coppens, F. (1985) ‘First arrival picking on common-offset trace collections for automatic estimation of static corrections’, Geophysical Prospecting, 33, pp. 1212–1231. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2478.1985.tb01360.x.
  5. Greff, K., Srivastava, R. K., Koutnik, J., Steunebrink, B. R. and Schmidhuber, J. (2017) ‘LSTM: A Search Space Odyssey’, IEEE Transactions on neural networks and learning systems, 28(10), pp. 2222–2232. doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2016.2582924.
  6. Haederle, M., Mathews, L. and Enright, M. (2016) ‘Development and implementation of the sparse refraction method to exploration for detrital Fe deposits’, ASEG-PESAAIG 25th Geophysical Conference and Exhibition, (Figure 1), pp. 702–708.
  7. Hatherly, P. J. (1982) ‘A computer method for determining seismic first arribal times’, Geophysics, 47(10), pp. 1431–1436.
  8. Hawkins, L. V. (1961) ‘The Reciprocal Method of Routine Shallow Seismic Refraction Investigations’, Geophysics, 26(6), pp. 806–819.
  9. Hochreiter, S. and Schmidhuber, J. (1997) ‘Long short-term memory’, Neural Computation, 9(8). doi: 10.3109/21695717.2013.794593.
  10. Johnson, Stephen, C. (1967) ‘Hierarchical Clustering Schemes’, Psychometrika, 32(3).
  11. McCormack, M. D., Zaucha, D. E. and Dushek, D. W. (1993) ‘First-break refraction event picking and seismic data trace editing using neural networks’, Geophysics, 58(1), pp. 67–78. doi: 10.1190/1.1443352.
  12. Palmer, D. (1981) ‘An introduction to the generalized reciprocal method of seismic refraction interpretation’, Geophysics, 46(22), pp. 1508–1518. doi: 10.1088/0957-4484/23/45/455702.
  13. Pealdi, R. and Clement, A. (1972) ‘Digital Processing of Refraction Data-Study of First Arrivals’, Geophysical Prospecting, 20(03), pp. 529–548. Available at: http://www.earthdoc.org/publication/publicationdetails/?publi cation=34282.
  14. Robinson, A. J. and Fallside, F. (1987) ‘The Utility Driven Dynamic Error Propagation’, p. 28.
  15. Sabbione, J. I. and Velis, D. (2010) ‘Automatic first-breaks picking: New strategies and algorithms’, Geophysics, 75(4), pp. V67–V76. doi: 10.1190/1.3463703.
  16. Salvador, S. and Chan, P. (2018) ‘FastDTW: Toward accurate dynamic time warping in linear time and space’, Intelligent Data Analysis, 11(5), pp. 561–580. doi: 10.3233/ida-2007-11508.
  17. Samé, A., Chamroukhi, F., Govaert, G. and Aknin, P. (2011) ‘Model-based clustering and segmentation of time series with changes in regime’, Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, 5(4), pp. 301–321. doi: 10.1007/s11634-011-0096-5.
  18. Wang, Q., Guo, Y., Yu, L. and Li, P. (2017) ‘Earthquake Prediction based on Spatio-Temporal Data Mining: An LSTM Network Approach’, IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, 6750(c), pp. 1–1. doi: 10.1109/TETC.2017.2699169.
  19. Wannes Meert, Craenendonck, T. V. (2018) ‘Wannesm/Dtaidistance V1.1.2.’ doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1314205.
  20. Williams, R. and Zipser, D. (1992) ‘Gradient-based learning algorithms for recurrent networks and their computational complexity’, Back-propagation: Theory, Architectures and Applications. doi: 10.1080/02673039508720837.
/content/journals/10.1080/22020586.2019.12072973
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): dynamic time warping; LSTM; neural networks; seismic refraction
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