1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 65, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 65, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Using both image and data domains to perform velocity inversion can help us resolve the long and short wavelength components of the velocity model, usually in that order. This translates to integrating migration velocity analysis into full waveform inversion. The migration velocity analysis part of the inversion often requires computing extended images, which is expensive when using conventional methods. As a result, we use pre‐stack wavefield (the double‐square‐root formulation) extrapolation, which includes the extended information (subsurface offsets) naturally, to make the process far more efficient and stable. The combination of the forward and adjoint pre‐stack wavefields provides us with update options that can be easily conditioned to improve convergence. We specifically use a modified differential semblance operator to split the extended image into a residual part for classic differential semblance operator updates and the image (Born) modelling part, which provides reflections for higher resolution information. In our implementation, we invert for the velocity and the image simultaneously through a dual objective function. Applications to synthetic examples demonstrate the features of the approach.

© 2017 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2016 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12439
2016-08-25
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12439
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AldawoodA., HoteitI. and AlkhalifahT.2014. The possibilities of compressed‐sensing‐based Kirchhoff prestack migration. Geophysics79, S113–S120.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. AlkhalifahT.2013. Prestack wavefield approximations. Geophysics78, T141–T149.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. AlkhalifahT. and FomelS.2010. Source-receiver two‐way wave extrapolation for prestack exploding‐reflector modeling and migration. 80th SEG meeting, Denver, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 2950–2955.
  4. AlkhalifahT., FomelS. and WuZ.2015. Source-receiver two‐way wave extrapolation for prestack exploding‐reflector modelling and migration. Geophysical Prospecting63, 23–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. AlkhalifahT. and WuZ.2014. FWI+MVA the natural way. 76th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Extended Abstracts, 2214–4509.
  6. AlmominA. and BiondiB.2012. Tomographic full waveform inversion: practical and computationally feasible approach. 82nd SEG meeting, Las Vegas, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  7. AlmominA. and BiondiB.2013. Tomographic full waveform inversion (TFWI) by successive linearizations and scale separations. 83rd SEG meeting, Houston, USA, Expanded Abstracts 1048–1052.
  8. ChaventG.1996. Duality methods for waveform inversion . Ph.D. dissertation. INRIA, France.
  9. ClémentF. and ChaventG.1993. Waveform inversion through MBTT formulation. In: Mathematical and Numerical Aspects of Wave Propagation. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. EtgenJ., GrayS.H. and ZhangY.2009. An overview of depth imaging in exploration geophysics. Geophysics74, WCA5–WCA17.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. FeiW. and WilliamsonP.2010. On the gradient artifacts in migration velocity analysis based on differential semblance optimization. 80th SEG meeting, Denver, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 4071–4076.
  12. FleuryC. and PerroneF.2012. Bi‐objective optimization for the inversion of seismic reflection data: Combined FWI and MVA. 82nd SEG meeting, Las Vegas, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 1–6.
  13. LameloiseC.‐A., ChaurisH. and NobleM.2015. Improving the gradient of the image‐domain objective function using quantitative migration for a more robust migration velocity analysis. Geophysical Prospecting63, 391–404.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. LiuY., SymesW.W. and LiZ.2013. Multisource least‐squares extended reverse time migration with preconditioning guided gradient method. 83rd SEG meeting, Houston, USA, 3709–3715.
  15. MaY., HaleD., GongB. and MengZ.2012. Image‐guided sparse‐model full waveform inversion. Geophysics77, R189–R198.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. PlessixR.‐E.2006. A review of the adjoint‐state method for computing the gradient of a functional with geophysical applications. Geophysical Journal International167, 495–503.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. PlessixR.‐E., de RoeckY.‐H. and ChaventG.1999. Waveform inversion of reflection seismic data for kinematic parameters by local optimization. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computation20, 1033–1052.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. SavaP. and FomelS.2003. Angle‐domain common‐image gathers by wavefield continuation methods. Geophysics68, 1065–1074.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. SymesW.W.1993. A differential semblance criterion for inversion of multioffset seismic reflection data. Journal of Geophysical Research98, 2061–2073.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. WangS., ChenF., ZhangH. and ShenY.2013. Reflection‐based full waveform inversion (RFWI) in the frequency domain. 83rd SEG meeting, Houston, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 877–881.
  21. WardsB., MargraveG. and LamoureuxM.2008. Phase‐shift time stepping for reverse time migration. 78th SEG meeting, Las Vegas, USA, 2262–2266.
  22. WeibullW. and ArntsenB.2013. Reverse time demigration using the extended imaging condition. 83rd SEG meeting, Houston, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 4015–4020.
  23. WuZ. and AlkhalifahT.2014. The optimized expansion method for wavefield extrapolation. 75th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, London, U.K., Extended Abstracts.
  24. XuS., ChenF., LambaréG. and ZhangY.2013. Full waveform inversion of reflected seismic data. Journal of Seismic Exploration22, 449–462.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12439
Loading
Migration velocity analysis using pre‐stack wave fields
Geophysical Prospecting 65, 639 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12439
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12439
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12439
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