1887
Volume 65, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Image gathers as a function of subsurface offset are an important tool for the inference of rock properties and velocity analysis in areas of complex geology. Traditionally, these gathers are thought of as multidimensional correlations of the source and receiver wavefields. The bottleneck in computing these gathers lies in the fact that one needs to store, compute, and correlate these wavefields for all shots in order to obtain the desired image gathers. Therefore, the image gathers are typically only computed for a limited number of subsurface points and for a limited range of subsurface offsets, which may cause problems in complex geological areas with large geologic dips. We overcome increasing computational and storage costs of extended image volumes by introducing a formulation that avoids explicit storage and removes the customary and expensive loop over shots found in conventional extended imaging. As a result, we end up with a matrix–vector formulation from which different image gathers can be formed and with which amplitude‐versus‐angle and wave‐equation migration velocity analysis can be performed without requiring prior information on the geologic dips. Aside from demonstrating the formation of two‐way extended image gathers for different purposes and at greatly reduced costs, we also present a new approach to conduct automatic wave‐equation‐based migration‐velocity analysis. Instead of focusing in particular offset directions and preselected subsets of subsurface points, our method focuses every subsurface point for all subsurface offset directions using a randomized probing technique. As a consequence, we obtain good velocity models at low cost for complex models without the need to provide information on the geologic dips.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12418
2016-08-26
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AkiK. and RichardsP.G.1980. Quantitative Seismology. New York, NY: Freeman & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AvronH. and ToledoS.2011. Randomized algorithms for estimating the trace of an implicit symmetric positive semi‐definite matrix. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery58, P1–P16.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BaysalE., KosloffD.D. and SherwoodJ.W.1983. Reverse time migration. Geophysics48, 1514–1524.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BerkhoutA.J.1993. A unified approach to acoustical reflection imaging. I: The forward model. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America93, 2005–2016.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BiondiB., SavaP.et al. 1999. Wave‐equation migration velocity analysis. 69th SEG annual international meeting, 1723–1726.
  6. BiondiB. and SymesW.W.2004. Angle‐domain common‐image gathers for migration velocity analysis by wavefield‐continuation imaging. Geophysics69(5), 1283.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. BourgeoisA., BourgetM., LaillyP., PouletM., RicarteP. and VersteegR.1991. Marmousi, model and data. 1990 Workshop on Practical Aspects of Seismic Data Inversion. European Association of Exploration Geophysicists.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brandsberg‐DahlS., de HoopM. and UrsinB.2003. Focusing in dip and AVA compensation on scattering angle/azimuth common image gathers. Geophysics68(1), 232–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. ChaurisH., NobleM.S., LambaréG. and PodvinP.2002. Migration velocity analysis from locally coherent events in 2‐D laterally heterogeneous media, Part I: Theoretical aspects. Geophysics67, 1202–1212.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. ClaerboutJ.1985a. Imaging the Earth's Interior. Blackwell Scientific Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. ClaerboutJ.1985b. Fundamentals of Geophysical Data Processing. Tulsa, OK: PennWell Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. ClaerboutJ.F.1970. Coarse grid calculations of waves in inhomogeneous media with application to delineation of complicated seismic structure. Geophysics35, 407–418.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. de BruinC., WapenaarC. and BerkhoutA.1990. Angle‐dependent reflectivity by means of prestack migration. Geophysics55(9), 1223.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. DohertyS.M. and ClaerboutJ.F.1974. Velocity analysis based on the wave equation. Technical Report 1, Stanford Exploration Project.
  15. DuchkovA.A. and MaartenV.2009. Velocity continuation in the downward continuation approach to seismic imaging. Geophysical Journal International176, 909–924.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. FriedlanderM.P. and SchmidtM.2012. Hybrid deterministic‐stochastic methods for data fitting. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing34, A1380–A1405.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. HaberE., ChungM. and HerrmannF.2012. An effective method for parameter estimation with PDE constraints with multiple right‐hand sides. SIAM Journal on Optimization22, 739–757.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. KoefoedO.1955. On the effect of Poisson's ratios of rock strata on the reflection coefficients of plane waves. Geophysical Prospecting3, 381–387.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. KorenZ. and RavveI.2011. Full‐azimuth subsurface angle domain wavefield decomposition and imaging Part I: Directional and reflection image gathers. Geophysics76, S1–S13.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. KrebsJ., AndersonJ., HinkleyD., NeelamaniR., LeeS., BaumsteinA.et al. 2009. Fast full‐wavefield seismic inversion using encoded sources. Geophysics74(6), P177–P188.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. KuhelH. and SacchiM.2003. Least‐squares wave‐equation migration for AVP/AVA inversion. Geophysics68(1), 262–273.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. KumarR., van LeeuwenT. and HerrmannF.J.2013. Efficient WEMVA using extended images. SEG Workshop on Advances in Model Building, Imaging, and FWI, Houston, TX.
  23. LagoR., PetrenkoA., FangZ. and HerrmannF.J.2014. Fast solution of time‐harmonic wave‐equation for full‐waveform inversion. EAGE Annual Conference Proceedings.
  24. LevinS.A.1984. Principle of reverse‐time migration. Geophysics49, 581–583.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. LuS., WhitmoreN., ValencianoA. and CheminguiN.2014. Illumination from 3D imaging of multiples: An analysis in the angle domain. 84th SEG annual meeting, Denver, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  26. MacKayS. and AbmaR.1992. Imaging and velocity analysis with depth‐focusing analysis. Geophysics57(12), 1608–1622.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. MahmoudianF. and MargraveG.F.2009. A review of angle domain common image gathers. Technical Report, University of Calgary.
  28. MulderW.2014. Subsurface offset behaviour in velocity analysis with extended reflectivity images. Geophysical Prospecting62, 17–33.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. NocedalJ. and WrightS.J.2000. Numerical Optimization. Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. PruchaM., BiondiB., SymesW.et al. 1999. Angle‐domain common image gathers by wave‐equation migration. 69th SEG annual international meeting, 824–827.
  31. RickettJ. and SavaP.2002. Offset and angle domain common image‐point gathers for shot profile migration. Geophysics67(3), 883–889.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. SavaP. and FomelS.2003. Angle‐domain common‐image gathers by wavefield continuation methods. Geophysics68(3), 1065–1074.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. SavaP. and VasconcelosI.2011. Extended imaging conditions for wave‐equation migration. Geophysical Prospecting59, 35–55.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. SavaP.C. and BiondiB.2004. Wave‐equation migration velocity analysis. I. Theory. Geophysical Prospecting52, 593–606.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. SavaP.C. and FomelS.2006. Time‐shift imaging condition in seismic migration. Geophysics71(6), S209–S217.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. ShenP. and SymesW.W.2008. Automatic velocity analysis via shot profile migration. Geophysics73, VE49–VE59.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. ShueyR.1985. A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations. Geophysics50(4), 609–614.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. StolkC.C., de HoopM.V. and SymesW.W.2009. Kinematics of shot‐geophone migration. Geophysics74(6), WCA19–WCA34.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. StolkC.C. and SymesW.W.2003. Smooth objective functionals for seismic velocity inversion. Inverse Problems19, 73–89.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. SymesW.W.2008a. Approximate linearized inversion by optimal scaling of prestack depth migration. Geophysics73(2), R23–R35.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. SymesW.W.2008b. Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting56, 765–790.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. SymesW.W.2014. Seismic inverse problems: Recent developments in theory and practice. Proceedings of the Inverse Problems from Theory to Applications Conference, pp. 2–6. IOP Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. SymesW.W. and CarazzoneJ.J.1991. Velocity inversion by differential semblance optimization. Geophysics56(5), 654–663.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. SymesW.W., SunD. and EnriquezM.2011. From modelling to inversion: Designing a well‐adapted simulator. Geophysical Prospecting59, 814–833.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. ten KroodeA., SmitD.‐J. and VerdelA.1994. Linearized inversed scattering in the presence of caustics. SPIE's 1994 International Symposium on Optics, Imaging, and Instrumentation, pp. 28–42. International Society for Optics and Photonics.
  46. van LeeuwenT., AravkinA.Y. and HerrmannF.J.2011. Seismic waveform inversion by stochastic optimization. International Journal of Geophysics.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. van LeeuwenT. and HerrmannF.J.2014. 3D frequency‐domain seismic inversion with controlled sloppiness. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing36, S192–S217.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. van WijngaardenA.1998. Imaging and characterization of angle‐dependent seismic reflection data . PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
  49. WhitmoreN.et al. 1983. Iterative depth migration by backward time propagation. 1983 SEG annual meeting.
  50. YangT. and SavaP.2015. Image‐domain wavefield tomography with extended common‐image‐point gathers. Geophysical Prospecting63, 1086–1096.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12418
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12418
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

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