1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 72, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 72, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

Seismic geometry design is the first step for the seismic prospecting, which would substantially influence the quality of acquired seismic data. Earlier researchers have focused more on tuning systemic parameters and offsetting source points. However, due to the complex geographical factors, the real layout is often different from the pre‐plan design, which is designed by experts in advance. In this paper, we aim to address the source point deviating problem when the pre‐plan design is unsuitable for geographical conditions. Although there exist many research works in this aspect, few of them have been applied in practice and the offset of source points in the field still mainly relies on manual work. In this paper, we propose a method based on dynamic programming to deviate source points automatically while maintaining the smoothness of source lines and taking the uniformity of fold distribution into account. To verify the effectiveness of our method, we also compare the uniformity of offset and azimuth after automatically deviating source points with the pre‐plan design. Experimental results show that our proposed method achieves better uniformity and keeps more smooth source lines which are conducive to the construction. Moreover, on the data set collected in a mountainous area, we observe that our method slightly suppresses the acquisition footprints.

© 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2023 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13453
2024-02-21
2025-03-17

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13453
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bai, X., Deng, Z., Zhang, X., Chen, J., Tang, C., Zhang, D. & Teng, Y. (2010) Control point uniformity analysis in near‐surface structure investigation. In: 2010 SEG annual meeting. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1999–2003.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bai, Z., Xu, Y., Pan, Y., Hu, Y., Zhao, J., Wang, H. & Zhu, X. (2020) Source optimization technology based on coverage uniform. In International Field Exploration And Development Conference. Cham: Springer, pp. 185–191.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Büker, F., Green, A.G. & Horstmeyer, H. (1998) Shallow 3‐D seismic reflection surveying: data acquisition and preliminary processing strategies. Geophysics, 63(4), 1434–1450.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Brune, R.H., O'Sullivan, B. & Lu, L. (1994) Comprehensive analysis of marine 3‐D bin coverage. The Leading Edge, 13(7), 757–762.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen, F. & Peter, D. (2021) Toward autonomous event identification in wave‐equation traveltime inversion. Geophysics, 86(6), 839–848.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Chicco, D., Warrens, M.J. & Jurman, G. (2021) The coefficient of determination R‐squared is more informative than SMAPE, MAE, MAPE, MSE and RMSE in regression analysis evaluation. PeerJ Computer Science, 7, e623. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj‐cs.623
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Durante, J.L., Nascimento, J. & Powell, W.B. (2017) Backward approximate dynamic programming with hidden semi‐Markov stochastic models in energy storage optimization. arXiv. [Preprint] Available from: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1710.03914
  8. Eddy, S.R. (2004) What is dynamic programming?Nature Biotechnology, 22(7), 909–910.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Forster, A. & Murphy, A.L. (2009) CLIQUE: Role‐free clustering with q‐learning for wireless sensor networks. In: 29th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, pp. 441–449.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Gao, F., Geng, P., Guo, J., Liu, Y., Guo, D., Su, Y., Zhou, J., Wei, X., Li, J. & Liu, X. (2022) ApolloRL: a reinforcement learning platform for autonomous driving. arXiv . [Preprint] https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.12609
  11. García, C.E., Prett, D.M. & Morari, M. (1989) Model predictive control: theory and practice—a survey. Automatica, 25(3), 335–348.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. He, D. (2016) Acquisition footprints extracting from raw data can be estimated by the azimuth and offset entropy of the geometry. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on environment and engineering geophysics & summit forum of Chinese Academy of Engineering on Engineering Science and Technology. Zhengzhou, China: Atlantis Press, pp. 343–346.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hu, F., Luo, J., Xiao, W., Yang, Z. & Zhang, H. (2020) Comparison and analysis of attributes for different 3D seismic geometries with some folds. Chinese Journal of Engineering Geophysics, 17(1), 82–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Hu, J., Cao, J., Wang, H., Liu, S. & Wang, X. (2017) 3D traveltime computation for quasi‐P‐wave in orthorhombic media using dynamic programming. Geophysics, 83(1), 27–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Liashchynskyi, P. & Liashchynskyi, P. (2019) Grid search, random search, genetic algorithm: a big comparison for NAS. arXiv. [Preprint] Available from https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1912.06059
  16. Liu, B., Chen, L., Li, S., Liu, L., Sone, j. & Li, M. (2018) A new 3D observation system designed for a seismic ahead prospecting method in tunneling. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 77(4), 1547–1565.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Lu, X., Liao, X., Wang, Y., Wang, G., Fu, Z. & Tai, H. (2020) The tunnel seismic advance prediction method with wide illumination and a high signal‐to‐noise ratio. Geophysical Prospecting, 68(8), 2444–2458.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Ma, F., Liu, A., Wan, X., Zhong, S., Wen, J., Chen, X. & Ge, X. (2012) Uniformity technology and application effect analysis of 3D observation. Journal of Oil and Gas Technology, 34(5), 58–64.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Mattia, A. (2019) Using orthogonal Legendre polynomials to parameterize global geophysical optimizations: applications to seismic‐petrophysical inversion and 1D elastic full‐waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 67(2), 331–348.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Men, Z., Ning, H., Zhang, M., Li, W. & Liu, X. (2019) A method and application of irregular geometry design based on compressive sensing. In: SEG international exposition and annual meeting. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 268–272.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Naghizadeh, M., Crook, A. & Bossaer, S. (2022) Optimal infilling of seismic stations using Fresnel zone Ning analysis. In: Second international meeting for applied geoscience & energy. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 75–79.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Peng, W., Yu, J. & Jiang, J. (2014) Geometry design based on target‐oriented seismic illumination analysis. In: Beijing 2014 international geophysical conference & exposition. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 5–8.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Slawson, S.E., Monk, D.J. & Moran, J.W. (1997) Survey geometries that achieve uniform offset and azimuth sampling. In: 59th EAGE conference & exhibition. Houten, the Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 131.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Stein, J.A., Wojslaw, R., Langston, T. & Boyer, S. (2010) Wide‐azimuth land processing: fracture detection using offset vector tile technology. The Leading Edge, 29(11), 1328–1337.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Volker, A.W.F., Blacquière, G., Berkhout, A.J. & Ongkiehong, L. (2001) Comprehensive assessment of seismic acquisition geometries by focal beams, Part II: practical aspects and examples. Geophysics, 66(3), 918–931.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Wang, C. & Dong, S. (2020) Evaluation of high‐density 3D seismic layout offset distance uniformity. Progress in Geophysics, 35(6), 2220–2227.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Wu, S., Verschuur, E. & Blacquière, G. (2018) Automated target‐oriented acquisition geometry optimization in marine environment. In: 2018 SEG international exposition and annual meeting. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 107–111.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Wu, Y., Yin, W., He, Y., Guoshun, L., Ning, H., Zhang, D. & Pu, Q. (2012) A uniformity quantitative method for 3D geometry attributes. Oil Geophysical Prospecting, 47(3), 361–365.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Xie, X.‐B., He, Y.‐Q. & Li, P.‐M. (2013) Seismic illumination analysis and its applications in seismic survey design. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 56(5), 1568–1581.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Xu, L., Wei, F., Feng, G., Cheng, W. & Jiang, Z. (2014) Design and application of odd/even subdivided geometry in production seismology ‐ example to the 1 & 2 area. In: Beijing 2014 international geophysical conference & exposition. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 144–147.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Yan, S., Sun, X., Wu, X., Zhang, S. & Si, H. (2022) Building subsurface models with horizon‐guided interpolation and deep learning: application to the Volve field data. Geophysics, 87(4), 233–245.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Yan, S. & Wu, X. (2021) Seismic horizon extraction with dynamic programming. Geophysics, 86(2), 51–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Yan, Z. & Xie, X. (2016) Full‐wave seismic illumination and resolution analyses: a Poynting‐vector‐based method. Geophysics, 81(6), 447–458.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Zhang, H., Wang, M., Li, K., Ning, X., Han, Z. & Gu, Y. (2019) A method for determining the aspect ratio of patch: reanalysis of 85% rule. Oil Geophysical Prospecting, 54(5), 947–953.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang, K., Xia, Y., Ding, T., Chen, W., Wu, W. & Yi, Y. (2013) Design method for field shooting point offset based on high resolution remote sensing image and digital elevation model. Equipment for Geophysical Prospecting, 23(1), 37–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Zhao, G., Chen, H., Gao, X. & Wen, T. (2016) Prestack migration energy consistency processing method and application. Progress in Geophysics, 31(3), 1295–1299.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13453
Loading
A novel automatic source point deviating method based on dynamic programming
Geophysical Prospecting 72, 996 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13453
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13453
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13453
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Acquisition; Computing aspects; 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