1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 66, Issue 9
  5. Article
Volume 66, Issue 9
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Obtaining an accurate image of the subsurface still remains a great challenge for the seismic method. Migration algorithms aim mainly on positioning seismic events in complex geological contexts. Multiple reflections are typically not accounted for in this process, which can lead to the emergence of artefacts. In Marchenko imaging, we retrieve the complete up‐ and downgoing wavefields in the subsurface to construct an image without such artefacts. The quality of this image depends on the type of imaging condition that is applied. In this paper, we propose an imaging condition that is based on stabilized unidimensional deconvolution. This condition is computationally much cheaper than multidimensional deconvolution, which has been proposed for Marchenko imaging earlier. Two specific approaches are considered. In the first approach, we use the full up‐ and downgoing wavefields for deconvolution. Although this leads to balanced and relatively accurate amplitudes, the crosstalk is not completely removed. The second approach is to incorporate the initial focussing function in the deconvolution process, in such a way that the retrieval of crosstalk is avoided. We compare images with the results of the classical cross‐correlation imaging condition, which we apply to reverse‐time migrated wavefields and to the up‐ and downgoing wavefields that are retrieved by the Marchenko method.

© 2018 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2018 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12686
2018-09-18
2024-04-24

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12686
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AmundsenL.2001. Elimination of free‐surface‐related multiples without need of the source wavelet. Geophysics66, 327–341.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BehuraJ., WapenaarK. and SniederR.2014. Autofocus imaging: image reconstruction based on inverse scattering theory. Geophysics79, A19–A26.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BerkhoutA.J.2017. Utilization of multiple scattering: the next big step forward in seismic imaging. Geophysical Prospecting65, 106–145.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BerkhoutA.J. and VerschuurD.J.2006. Imaging of multiple reflections. Geophysics71, SI209–SI220.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. BrogginiF. and SniederR.2012. Connection of scattering principles: a visual and mathematical tour. European Journal of Physics33, 593–613.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. BrogginiF., SniederR. and WapenaarK.2014a. Data‐driven Green's function retrieval and application to imaging with multidimensional deconvolution. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth119, 425–441.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. BrogginiF., SniederR. and WapenaarK.2014b. Data‐driven wavefield focusing and imaging with multidimensional deconvolution: numerical examples for reflection data with internal multiples. Geophysics79, WA107–WA115.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. ChangW. and McMechanG.A.1986. Reverse‐time migration of offset vertical seismic profiling data using the excitation‐time imaging condition. Geophysics51, 67–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. ClaerboutJ.F.1971. Toward a unified theory of reflector mapping. Geophysics36, 467–481.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. da CostaFilho C.A., MelesG.A. and CurtisA.2017. Elastic internal multiple analysis and attenuation using Marchenko and interferometric methods. Geophysics82, Q1–Q12.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. de HoopA.T.1995. Handbook of Radiation and Scattering of Waves. Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. DukalskiM. and de VosK.2017. Marchenko inversion in a strong scattering regime including surface‐related multiples. Geophysical Journal International212, 760–776.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. FariaE.L. and StoffaP.L.1994. Traveltime computation in transversely isotropic media. Geophysics59, 272–281.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. FleuryC.2013. Increasing illumination and sensitivity of reverse‐time migration with internal multiples. Geophysical Prospecting61, 891–906.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. GardnerG.H.F., GardnerL.W. and GregoryA.R.1974. Formation velocity and – the diagnostic basics for stratigraphic traps. Geophysics39, 770–780.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. GuittonA.2002. Shot‐profile migration of multiple reflections. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1296–1299. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. LomasA. and CurtisA.2018. 3D Marchenko redatuming using 2D and 3D seismic data. Expanded Abstracts, 80th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  18. MalcolmA.E., UrsinB. and MaartenV.2009. Seismic imaging and illumination with internal multiples. Geophysical Journal International176, 847–864.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. MelesG.A., WapenaarK. and CurtisA.2016. Reconstructing the primary reflections in seismic data by Marchenko redatuming and convolutional interferometry. Geophysics81, Q15–Q26.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. MuijsR., RobertssonJ.O. and HolligerK.2007. Prestack depth migration of primary and surface‐related multiple reflections: part I – imaging. Geophysics72, S59–S69.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. OngC., LapilliC., PerdomoJ., CoatesR.2013. Extended imaging and illumination in wave migrations. Presented at the 2013 SEG Annual Meeting, Houston, USA, 4116–4120.
  22. OrtizL.L.2015. Método One‐step para modelagem usando os polinômios de Chebyshev e uma condição de imagem para migração com a equação unidirecional da onda: Dissert. de Mestrado, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Brasil.
  23. PestanaR. and StoffaP.2010. Time evolution of the wave equation using rapid expansion method. Geophysics75, T121–T131.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. RavasiM.2017. Rayleigh‐Marchenko redatuming for target‐oriented, true‐amplitude imaging. Geophysics82, S439–S452.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. SantosA.W.G., PestanaR.C. and AraujoE.S.2012. Atenuaçăo de artefatos da migraçăo reversa no tempo. Presented at the V Simpósio Brasileiro de Geofísica.
  26. SchleicherJ., CostaJ.C. and NovaisA.2008. A comparison of imaging conditions for wave‐equation shot‐profile migration. Geophysics73, S219–S227.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. SinghS. and SniederR.2017. Strategies for imaging with Marchenko‐retrieved Greens functions. Geophysics82, 1–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. SinghS., SniederR., van der NeutJ., SlobE. and WapenaarK.2017. Accounting for free‐surface multiples Marchenko imaging. Geophysics, 82, R19–R30.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. SlobE., WapenaarK., BrogginiF. and SniederR.2014. Seismic reflector imaging using internal multiples with Marchenko‐type equations. Geophysics79, S63–S76.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. SlobE.C. and WapenaarK.2017. Theory for Marchenko imaging of marine seismic data with free surface multiple elimination. 79th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Paris, France, Expanded Abstracts.
  31. StaringM., GrobbeN., van der NeutJ. and WapenaarK.2017. Sparse iversion for solving the coupled Marchenko equations including free‐surface multiples, 79th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Paris, France, Expanded Abstracts.
  32. ThorbeckeJ., SlobE., BrackenhoffJ., van der NeutJ. and WapenaarK.2017. Implementation of the Marchenko method. Geophysics82, WB29–WB45.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. ThorbeckeJ., van der NeutJ. and WapenaarK.2013. Green's function retrieval with Marchenko equations: a sensitivity analysis. SEG Technical Program, 83rd Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts.
  34. ThorbeckeJ.W. and DraganovD.2011. Finite‐difference modeling experiments for seismic interferometry. Geophysics76, H1–H18.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. ValencianoA. and BiondiB.2003. 2D deconvolution imaging condition for shot profile migration. 73rd Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts, 1059–1062.
  36. van der NeutJ., ThorbeckeJ., MehtaK., SlobE. and WapenaarK.2011. Controlled‐source interferometric redatuming by crosscorrelation and multidimensional deconvolution in elastic media. Geophysics76, SA63–SA76.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. van der NeutJ., VasconcelosI. and WapenaarK.2015. On Green's function retrieval by iterative substitution of the coupled Marchenko equations. Geophysical Journal International203, 792–813.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. VasconcelosI., van ManenD.J., RavasiM., WapenaarK. and van der NeutJ.2014, Marchenko redatuming: advantages and limitations in complex media. SEG Technical Program, Workshop W‐11, 84th Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts.
  39. VasconcelosI., WapenaarK., van der NeutJ., ThomsonC. and RavasiM.2015. Using inverse transmission matrices for Marchenko redatuming in highly complex media: SEG Technical Program, 85th Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 5081–5086.
  40. VerschuurD.J., BerkhoutA.J. and WapenaarC.P.A.1992. Adaptative surface‐related multiple elimination. Geophysics57, 1166–1177.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. WangY., SunH. and SchusterG.T.1999. Migration imaging condition for primary reflections. Presented at the 1999 SEG Annual Meeting.
  42. WapenaarC.P.A. and GrimbergJ.L.T.1996. Reciprocity theorems for one‐way wave fields. Geophysical Journal International127, 169–177.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. WapenaarK., DraganovD. and RobertssonJ.O.A.2008. Redatuming. In: Seismic Interferometry, Geophysics Reprint Series, pp. 331–448. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, USA.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. WapenaarK., FokkemaJ., DillenM. and ScherpenhuijsenP.2000. One‐way acoustic reciprocity and its applications in multiple elimination and time‐lapse seismics. Presented at the SEG Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 2377–2380.
  45. WapenaarK., ThorbeckeJ., van der NeutJ., BrogginiF., SlobE. and SniederR.2014a. Green's function retrieval from reflection data, in absence of a receiver at the virtual source position. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America135, 2847–2861.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. WapenaarK., ThorbeckeJ., van der NeutJ., BrogginiF., SlobE. and SniederR.2014b. Marchenko imaging. Geophysics79, WA39–WA57.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. WegleinA.B., AraújoF.V., CarvalhoP.M., StoltR.H., MatsonK.H., CoatesR.T., CorriganD., FosterD.J., ShawS.A. and ZhangH.2003. Inverse scattering series and seismic exploration. Inverse Problems19, R27.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. ZhangY., SunJ. and GrayS.2007. Reverse‐time migration: amplitude and implementation issues. SEG Technical Program, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts, 2145–2149.
  49. ZhouM., SunH. and SchusterG.T.2003. The application of primary‐only imaging condition to smaart data. Presented at the 2003 SEG Annual Meeting, 1012–1015.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12686
Loading
Marchenko imaging by unidimensional deconvolution
Geophysical Prospecting 66, 1653 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12686
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12686
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12686
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Imaging; Inversion; Modelling; 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