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

Abstract

ABSTRACT

In recent years, several research works dealing with velocity model independent seismic imaging have been published. These methods are capable of simulating arbitrary offset seismic sections by stacking a set of measured prestack seismic data along paraxial travel‐time surfaces. Hyperbolic common‐reflection‐surface travel‐time approximation is one of the most robust descriptions, which simulates not only zero‐offset but also finite‐offset sections with high accuracy from noisy multi‐coverage seismic data. In order to reconstruct seismic reflection events in common‐offset sections, the common‐reflection‐surface travel‐time approximation depends on five kinematic attributes (or parameters) for each selected point of the common‐offset seismic section. The main challenge of this method is to provide a computationally efficient data‐driven strategy for accurately determining the best set of parameters. Here, we introduce an approach for simultaneously estimating the five parameters from prestack seismic data by a very fast simulated annealing optimisation algorithm. For each sample point of the common‐offset section to be simulated, we determine only one set of common reflection surface attributes corresponding to the global maximum or the event with highest coherency. We applied our method of simultaneous global optimisation on synthetic and real data examples and showed the potential of the proposed strategy to enhance the reflection events in noisy data, even with very low signal‐to‐noise ratio. Finally, we demonstrate the regularisation capability of our method in a land seismic data example with missing traces for near, middle, and far offsets. In order to better appreciate the field data results, we present the time‐migrated sections with and without application of the proposed regularisation strategy.

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

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12472
2016-11-25
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12472
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BerglerS., DuveneckE., HöchtG., ZhangY. and HubralP.2001a. Common‐reflection‐surface stack for common‐offset: practical aspects. 63rd SEG annual international meeting, San Antonio, TX, Expanded Abstracts, P076.
  2. BerglerS., ZhangY., ChiraP., ViethK.‐U. and HubralP.2001b. Common‐reflection‐surface stack and attributes. 7th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Expanded Abstracts.
  3. BerglerS., DuveneckE., HöchtG., ZhangY. and HubralP.2002a. Common‐reflection‐surface stack for converted waves. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica46(2), 165–175.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BerglerS., MannJ., HöchtG. and HubralP.2002b. The finite‐offset CRS stack: an alternative stacking tool for subsalt imaging. 72nd SEG annual international meeting, Salt Lake City, UT, Expanded Abstracts.
  5. BoelsenT. and MannJ.2005a. 2D CO CRS stack for OBS and VSP data and arbitrary top‐surface topography. EAGE 67th Conference and Technical Exhibition, Madrid, Spain, Expanded Abstracts, P181.
  6. BoelsenT. and MannJ.2005b. Common‐reflection‐surface stack for OBS and VSP geometries and multi‐component seismic reflection data. 9th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Expanded Abstracts, 1545–1550.
  7. BortfeldR.1989. Geometrical ray theory: rays and traveltimes in seismic systems (second order approximation of the traveltimes). Geophysics1, 342–349.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. ČervenýV. and PšenčíkI.1988. SEIS88, Ray tracing program package. Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. http://www.sw3d.mff.cuni.cz.
  9. De BazelaireE.1988. Normal moveout revisited inhomogeneous media and curved interfaces. Geophysics53(2), 143–157.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. EirasJ.F. and KinoshitaE.M.1990. Geologia e perspectiva petrolífera da bacia do Tacutu. In: Origem e Evolução de Bacias Sedimentares. Rio de Janeiro: Petrobras, 197–220, 416p.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. FomelS. and KazinnikR.2013, Non‐hyperbolic common‐reflection‐surface. Geophysical Prospecting61, 21–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. GarabitoG., CruzJ.C.R., HubralP. and CostaJ.2001. Common reflection surface stack by global optimization. 71st SEG annual international meeting, San Antonio, TX, Expanded Abstracts.
  13. GarabitoG., ChiraP. and CruzJ.C.R.2011. Numerical analysis of the common‐reflection‐surface traveltime approximation. Journal of Applied Geophysics74, 89–99.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. GarabitoG., StoffaP.L., LucenaL.S. and CruzJ.C.R.2012. Part I—CRS stack: global optimization of the 2D CRS‐attributes. Journal of Applied Geophysics85, 92–101.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. GarabitoG., StoffaP. and SöllnerW.2013. Global optimization of the common‐offset CRS‐attributes: synthetic and field data application. 13th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Expanded Abstracts.
  16. GelchinskyB., BerkovitchA. and KeydarS.1999a. Multifocusing homeomorphic imaging: Part 1. Basic concepts and formulas. Journal of Applied Geophysics: Special Issue: Macro‐Model Independent Seismic Reflection Imaging42(3)–(4), 229–242.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. GelchinskyB., BerkovitchA. and KeydarS.1999b. Multifocusing homeomorphic imaging: Part 2. Multifold data set and multifocusing. Journal of Applied Geophysics: Special Issue: Macro‐Model Independent Seismic Reflection Imaging42(3)–(4), 243–260.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. GelchinskyB. and KeydarS.1999. Homeomorphic imaging approach — theory and practice. Journal of Applied Geophysics42(3)–(4), 169–228.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. HöchtG., de BazelaireE., MajerP. and HubralP.1999. Seismic and optics: Hyperbolae and curvatures. Journal of Applied Geophysics42, 261–281.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. HöchtG., RicarteP., BerglerS. and LandaE.2009. Operator‐oriented CRS interpolation. Geophysical Prospecting57, 957–979.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. HubralP. and KreyT.1980. Interval Velocities from Seismic Reflection Traveltime Measurements. Tulsa, OK: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 203p.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. HubralP., SchleicherJ. and TygelM.1992a. Three‐dimensional paraxial ray properties: Part I. Basic relations. Journal of Seismic Exploration1, 265–279.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. HubralP., SchleicherJ. and TygelM.1992b. Three‐dimensional paraxial ray properties: Part II. Applications. Journal of Seismic Exploration1, 347–362.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. IngberL.1989. Very fast simulated re‐annealing. Mathematical and Computer Modelling12(8), 967–973.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. JägerR., MannJ., HöchtG. and HubralP.2001. Common reflection surface stack: image and Attributes. Geophysics66, 97–109.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. JägerR.1999. The common‐reflection‐surface stack: theory and application. Master thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Germany.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. LandaE., BeydounW., TarantolaA.1989. Reference velocity model estimation from prestack waveforms: Coherence optimization by simulated annealing. Geophysics, 54(8), 984–990.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. LandaE., GurevichB., KeydarS. and TrachtmanP.1999. Application of multifocusing method for subsurface imaging. Journal of Applied Geophysics3, 283–300.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. LandaE., KeydarS. and MoserT.2010. Multifocusing revisited – inhomogeneous media and curved interfaces. Geophysical Prospecting58, 925–938.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. MesquitaM.J.L., CruzJ.C.R., FernandesA.S., SantosR.C.S. and RezendeD.P.2015. Seismic velocity inversion using the FO CRS stack in layered medium. 14th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Expanded Abstracts.
  31. MinatoS., TsujiT., MatsuokaT., NishizakaN. and IkedaM.2012. Global optimization by simulated annealing for common reflection surface stacking and its application to low‐fold marine data in southwest Japan. Exploration Geophysics43(2), 59–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. MüllerT.1999. The common reflection surface stack method: seismic imaging without explicit knowledge of the velocity model. PhD thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Germany.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. NeidellN.S. and TanerM.T.1971. Semblance and others coherence measures for multichannel data. Geophysics, 36, 482–497.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. SenM.K. and StoffaP.L.2013. Global Optimization Methods in Geophysical Inversion. Cambridge University Press, second edition, 289p.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. SchwarzB., VanelleC., GajewskiD. and KashtanB.2014. Curvatures and inhomogeneities: an improved common‐reflection‐surface approach. Geophysics79(5), 231–240.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. ZhangY., BerglerS. and HubralP.2002. Model‐independent travel‐time attributes for 2D, finite‐offset multicoverage reflections. Pure and Applied Geophysics159, 1–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. ZhangY., BerglerS., TygelM. and HubralP.2001. Common‐reflection‐surface (CRS) stack for common‐offset. Geophysical Prospecting49, 709–718.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12472
Loading
Finite‐offset common reflection surface stack using global optimisation for parameter estimation: a land data example
Geophysical Prospecting 65, 1123 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12472
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12472
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12472
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Data processing; Inverse problem; Parameter estimation; Seismic rays; Seismics

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