1887
Volume 68, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

We present a new approach to enhancing weak prestack reflection signals without sacrificing higher frequencies. As a first step, we employ known multidimensional local stacking to obtain an approximate ‘model of the signal’. Guided by phase spectra from this model, we can detect very weak signals and make them visible and coherent by ‘repairing’ corrupted phase of original data. Both presented approaches – phase substitution and phase sign corrections – show good performance on complex synthetic and field data suffering from severe near‐surface scattering where conventional processing methods are rendered ineffective. The methods are mathematically formulated as a special case of time‐frequency masking (common in speech processing) combined with the signal model from local stacking. This powerful combination opens the avenue for a completely new family of approaches for multi‐channel seismic processing that can address seismic processing of land data with nodes and single sensors in the desert environment.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12956
2020-05-15
2024-04-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bakulin, A., Silvestrov, I., Dmitriev, M., Golikov, P., Neklyudov, D., Protasov, M., Gadylshin, K., Tcheverda, V. and Dolgov, V. (2017) Nonlinear beamforming for enhancing pre‐stack data with challenging near surface or overburden. 87th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 4996–5000.
  2. Baykulov, M. and Gajewski, D. (2009) Prestack seismic data enhancement with partial common‐reflection‐surface (CRS) stack. Geophysics, 74(3), V49–V58.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Berkovitch, A., Deev, K. and Landa, E. (2011) How non‐hyperbolic MultiFocusing improves depth imaging. First Break, 29, 103–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Blackledget, J.M. (2006) Digital Signal Processing. Horwood Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Borcea, L., Papanicolaou, G. and Tsogka, C. (2006) Coherent interferometric imaging in clutter. Geophysics, 71(4), SI165–SI175.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Buzlukov, V. and Landa, E. (2013) Imaging improvement by prestack signal enhancement. Geophysical Prospecting, 61, 1150–1158.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Erdogan, H., Hershey, J.R., Watanabe, S. and Le Roux, J. (2015) Phase‐sensitive and recognition‐boosted speech separation using deep recurrent neural networks. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 708–712.
  8. Gamboa, F., Farias, A.L., Freitas, L. and Tygel, M. (2007) Improving seismic vertical resolution by means of the common‐reflection‐surface (CRS) method. Annual WIT report, 94–104.
  9. Garabito, G., Cruz, J.C.R. and Söllner, W. (2016) Finite‐offset common reflection surface stack using global optimization for parameter estimation: a land data example. Geophysical Prospecting, 65, 1123–1137.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hoecht, G., Ricarte, P., Bergler, S. and Landa, E. (2009) Operator‐oriented interpolation. Geophysical Prospecting, 57, 957–979.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Liang, S., Liu, W., Jiang, W. and Xue, W. (2013) The optimal ratio time‐frequency mask for speech separation in terms of the signal‐to‐noise ratio. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 134, EL452.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lichman, E. (1999) Automated phase‐based moveout correction. 69th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 1150–1153.
  13. Oppenheim, A.V. and Lim, J.S. (1981) The importance of phase in signals. Proceedings of the IEEE, 69, 529–541.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Ulrych, T.J., Kaplan, S.T., Sacchi, M.D. and Galloway, E. (2007) The essence of phase in seismic data processing and inversion. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 1765–1769.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Wang, D. (2008) Time‐frequency masking for speech separation and its potential for hearing aid design. Trends in Amplification, 12, 332–353.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Williamson, D.S. and Wang, D. (2017) Time‐frequency masking in the complex domain for speech dereverberation and denoising. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech and Language Processing, 25(7), 1492–1501.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Yilmaz, O. and Rickard, S. (2004) Blind separation of speech mixtures via time‐frequency masking. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 52, 1830–1846.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhang, Y., Bergler, S. and Hubral, P. (2001) Common‐reflection‐surface (CRS) stack for common offset. Geophysical Prospecting, 49, 709–718.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12956
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12956
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Data processing; Noise; Signal processing

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