1887
Volume 71, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Traditional full‐waveform inversion is a non‐linear and ill‐posed inversion problem. To reduce the non‐linearity of it, joint migration inversion (joint migration inversion) was proposed as an alternative. Joint migration inversion tries to minimize the mismatch between measured and modelled reflection data. One key feature of joint migration inversion is its parameterization: two separate parameters, reflectivity (for the amplitudes of reflected events) and propagation velocity (for the phase effects). This separation helps to reduce the non‐linearity of the inversion. During joint migration inversion, with the velocity being updated, the reflectors in the updated image are also shifting in depth accordingly, this phenomenon is called depth–velocity ambiguity. This interaction between the two parameters during inversion is desired to keep the image time consistent with the measured data but may lead to non‐robustness of joint migration inversion due to the presence of local minima. Therefore, we propose a more robust joint migration inversion scheme, which parameterizes the models with vertical time, termed pseudo‐time joint migration inversion. In pseudo‐time, the updates of velocity will not result in the associated vertical location changes of reflectors in the estimated image. Instead, the reflectors are mainly getting more focused. One limitation is that the depth‐pseudo‐time conversion process assumes a simple linear relationship between depth and pseudo‐time, which might cause some artefacts in the converted models when there exist strong lateral velocity variations. One subsequent round of depth joint migration inversion is recommended to resolve this issue. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed method with a two‐dimensional synthetic example in an extreme scenario, where the initial velocity model is homogeneous, a realistic offshore two‐dimensional synthetic example, a two‐dimensional field example from the Vøring basin in Norway and a simple three‐dimensional synthetic example. In all examples, pseudo‐time joint migration inversion manages to recover more reasonable updates in the inverted velocity and invert more focused reflectors in the inverted image, compared to depth joint migration inversion.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13296
2023-01-20
2023-01-31
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/gpr/71/2/gpr13296.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13296&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Alasmri, H. & Verschuur, D.J. (2019) Towards Q‐compensation in full wavefield migration and joint migration inversion. In: 81st EAGE annual conference & exhibition, volume 2019. Houten, The Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alshuhail, A.A. & Verschuur, D.J. (2019) Robust estimation of vertical symmetry axis models via joint migration inversion: including multiples in anisotropic parameter estimation. Geophysics, 84(1), C57–C74.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Berkhout, A.J. (2014a) Review paper: An outlook on the future of seismic imaging, Part I: forward and reverse modelling. Geophysical Prospecting, 62(5), 911–930.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Berkhout, A.J. (2014b) Review paper: An outlook on the future of seismic imaging, Part II: Full‐wavefield migration. Geophysical Prospecting, 62(5), 931–949.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Berkhout, A.J. (2014c) Review paper: An outlook on the future of seismic imaging, Part III: Joint migration inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 62(5), 950–971.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Davydenko, M., Verschuur, D. & Berkhout, A. (2014) Omnidirectional extension of full wavefield migration. In: 76th EAGE annual conference & exhibition, volume 2014. Houten, The Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Davydenko, M. & Verschuur, D.J. (2017a) Full‐wavefield estimation of angle‐dependent reflectivity and migration velocity. In: 87th annual international meeting. SEG Technical Program Extended Abstract 2017. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 5631–5635.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Davydenko, M. & Verschuur, D.J. (2017b) Full‐wavefield migration: using surface and internal multiples in imaging. Geophysical Prospecting, 65(1), 7–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Eisenberg, G., Schuenemann, E., Gierse, G., Verschuur, E. & Qu, S. (2019) Robust velocity estimation via joint migration inversion and full waveform inversion. In: 89th annual international meeting. SEG Technical Program Extended Abstracts 2019. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1224–1228.
  10. Gazdag, J. (1978) Wave equation migration with the phase‐shift method. Geophysics, 43(7), 1342–1351.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Ma, X. & Alkhalifah, T. (2012) Wavefield extrapolation in pseudo‐depth domain. In: 74th EAGE conference & exhibition incorporating EUROPEC 2012, volume 2012. Houten, The Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1MA–Z51.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Ma, X. & Alkhalifah, T. (2013) Wavefield extrapolation in pseudodepth domain. Geophysics, 78(2), S81–S91.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Operto, S., Ravaut, C., Improta, L., Virieux, J., Herrero, A. & Dell'Aversana, P. (2004) Quantitative imaging of complex structures from dense wide‐aperture seismic data by multiscale traveltime and waveform inversions: a case study. Geophysical Prospecting, 52(6), 625–651.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Plessix, R., Milcik, P., Corcoran, C., Kuehl, H. & Matson, K. (2012) Full waveform inversion with a pseudotime approach. In: 74th EAGE conference and exhibition incorporating EUROPEC 2012, volume 2012. Houten, The Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. cp‐293–00717.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Plessix, R.‐É. (2013) A pseudo‐time formulation for acoustic full waveform inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 192(2), 613–630.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Plessix, R.‐E., Baeten, G., de Maag, J.W., Klaassen, M., Rujie, Z. & Zhifei, T. (2010) Application of acoustic full waveform inversion to a low‐frequency large‐offset land data set. In: 80th annual international meeting. SEG Technical Program Extended Abstracts 2010. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 930–934.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Qu, S. (2020) “Simultaneous joint migration inversion as a high‐resolution time‐lapse imaging method for reservoir monitoring”. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology.
  18. Qu, S., Van den Brule, Y. & Verschuur, D. (2020) A stable scheme of joint migration inversion in the pseudo‐time domain. In: 82nd EAGE annual conference & exhibition, volume 2020. Houten, The Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Qu, S. & Verschuur, D. (2021) An effective scheme of pseudo‐time joint migration inversion with an AVO mitigating workflow. In: 83rd EAGE annual conference & exhibition, volume 2021. Houten, The Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Qu, S. & Verschuur, D.J. (2020) Simultaneous joint migration inversion for high‐resolution imaging/inversion of time‐lapse seismic datasets. Geophysical Prospecting, 68, 1167–1188.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Staal, X.R. (2015) “Combined imaging and velocity estimation by Joint Migration Inversion”. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology.
  22. Staal, X.R. & Verschuur, D.J. (2013) Joint migration inversion, imaging including all multiples with automatic velocity update. In: 75th EAGE conference & exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2013, volume 2013. European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. cp‐348–00920.
  23. Sun, Y., Kim, Y., Qu, S., Verschuur, D., Almomin, A. & van Borselen, R. (2018a) Joint migration inversion versus FWI‐RTM – a comparison study on a 2D realistic deep water model. In: 80th conference and exhibition. Houten, The Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1–5.
  24. Sun, Y., Kim, Y., Qu, S. & Verschuur, E. (2019) Joint migration inversion versus FWI‐RTM: A comprehensive comparison study based upon 2D realistic offshore models. In: International petroleum technology conference, Beijing, China, March 2019. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: International Petroleum Technology Conference.
  25. Sun, Y., Kim, Y.S., Qu, S., Verschuur, E., Almomin, A. & van Borselen, R. (2018b) Angle‐dependent full wavefield migration based upon full waveform inversion and joint migration inversion. In: 88th annual international meeting. SEG Technical Program Extended Abstracts 2018. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 4357–4361.
  26. Sun, Y., Verschuur, E. & Qu, S. (2019) Research note: Derivations of gradients in angle‐independent joint migration inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 67(3), 572–579.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Symes, W.W. (2008) Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 56(6), 765–790.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Tarantola, A. (1984) Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation. Geophysics, 49(8), 1259–1266.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. van Groenestijn, G.J.A. & Verschuur, D.J. (2009) Estimating primaries by sparse inversion and application to near‐offset data reconstruction. Geophysics, 74, A23–A28.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Verschuur, D. & Staal, X. (2014) Using primaries and multiples in time‐lapse imaging and velocity estimation. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2014. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 4955–4959.
  31. Verschuur, D.J., Staal, X.R. & Berkhout, A.J. (2016) Joint migration inversion: Simultaneous determination of velocity fields and depth images using all orders of scattering. The Leading Edge, 35(12), 1037–1046.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Virieux, J. & Operto, S. (2009) An overview of full‐waveform inversion in exploration geophysics. Geophysics, 74(6), WCC127–WCC152.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Xu, S., Wang, D., Chen, F., Zhang, Y. & Lambare, G. (2012) Full waveform inversion for reflected seismic data. In: 74th EAGE conference and exhibition incorporating EUROPEC 2012, volume 2012. Houten, The Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. cp‐293–00729.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13296
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13296
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): full waveform; imaging; inversion; Parameter estimation; seismics
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