1887
Volume 72, Issue 7
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

The construction of an accurate and high‐resolution reservoir parameter model is crucial for reservoir characterization. However, due to the band‐limited characteristics of seismic data, the inversion results heavily rely on the accuracy of the initial model. Most existing techniques for constructing an initial model interpolate well logging data within the stratigraphic framework, neglecting the effect of the stratigraphic sequence, which compromises the reliability of the initial model. The stratigraphic sequence is essential for dividing stratigraphic evolution stages and defining a geological relationship between reservoirs within the stratigraphic framework. Therefore, an initial model construction method constrained by stratigraphic sequence representation is proposed for pre‐stack seismic inversion. The process begins with establishing the stratigraphic framework using horizon and fault data. Subsequently, the collaborative sparse representation algorithm is used to learn a joint dictionary that captures the relationship of structural features between seismic data and stratigraphic sequence from the well logging data. In the process of seismic data representation, the stratigraphic sequence is accurately represented in three‐dimensional space by sharing sparse coefficients in the joint dictionary. Finally, the elastic parameter model is constructed by integrating the stratigraphic framework, stratigraphic sequence and well logging data, providing a reliable initial model for pre‐stack seismic inversion. The main innovation of the proposed method is the three‐dimensional representation of the stratigraphic sequence. A synthetic example demonstrates that the proposed method produces a more accurate initial model than conventional interpolation methods. Additionally, when applied to field data, it yields satisfactory results even without complete S‐wave velocity well logging data.

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

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13558
2024-08-23
2026-02-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13558
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aharon, M., Elad, M. & Bruckstein, A. (2006) K‐SVD: an algorithm for designing overcomplete dictionaries for sparse representation. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 54(11), 4311–4322.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Aki, K. & Richards, P. (2002) Quantitative seismology. Sausalito, CA: University Science Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Buland, A. & Omre, H. (2003) Bayesian linearized AVO inversion. Geophysics, 68(1), 185–198.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Chiu, S.K. (2014) Multidimensional interpolation using a model‐constrained minimum weighted norm interpolation. Geophysics, 79(5), V191–V199.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Chiu, S.K. (2020) Low‐frequency extrapolation using higher‐frequency multi‐channel prediction filters. In: SEG Technical program expanded abstracts 2020. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2835–2839.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Corrales Guerrero, M.A., Hoteit, H. & Ravasi, M. (2024) Seis2rock: a data‐driven approach to direct petrophysical inversion of pre‐stack seismic data. Earth and Space Science, 11, e2023EA003301.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. de Ribet, B. & González, G. (2017) Reservoir‐scale volumetric interpretation: a new approach to building a low‐frequency background model. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2733–2737.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Eidsvik, J., Avseth, P., Omre, H., Mukerji, T. & Mavko, G. (2004) Stochastic reservoir characterization using prestack seismic data. Geophysics, 69(4), 978–993.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Farris, S., Barnier, G. & Clapp, R. (2022) Deep learning velocity model building using an ensemble regression approach. In: SEG/AAPG international meeting for applied geoscience and energy, August 2022. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 3637–3641.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Fawad, M., Rahman, M.J. & Mondol, N.H. (2021) Seismic reservoir characterization of potential co2 storage reservoir sandstones in Smeaheia area, northern North Sea. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 205, 108812.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Grana, D. (2016) Bayesian linearized rock‐physics inversion. Geophysics, 81(6), D625–D641.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Grana, D., de Figueiredo, L. & Mosegaard, K. (2022) Markov chain Monte Carlo for petrophysical inversion. Geophysics, 87(1), M13–M24.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Guo, Q., Zhang, H., Han, F. & Shang, Z. (2017) Prestack seismic inversion based on anisotropic Markov random field. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 56(2), 1069–1079.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Harris, E.C. (1975) The stratigraphic sequence: a question of time. World Archaeology, 7(1), 109–121.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hong, T. & Sen, M.K. (2009) A new MCMC algorithm for seismic waveform inversion and corresponding uncertainty analysis. Geophysical Journal International, 177(1), 14–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Huang, G., Chen, X., Li, J., Saad, O.M., Fomel, S., Luo, C., Wang, H. & Chen, Y. (2021) The slope‐attribute‐regularized high‐resolution prestack seismic inversion. Surveys in Geophysics, 42, 625–671.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Huang, G., Chen, X., Luo, C. & Chen, Y. (2020) Geological structure‐guided initial model building for prestack AVO/AVA inversion. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 59(2), 1784–1793.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Huang, G., Chen, X., Luo, C. & Li, X. (2019) Prestack waveform inversion by using an optimized linear inversion scheme. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 57(8), 5716–5728.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Huck, A., Quiquerez, G. & de Groot, P. (2010) Improving seismic inversion through detailed low frequency model building. In: 72nd EAGE conference and exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2010, cp–161‐00184. Houten, the Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Jia, W., Zong, Z. & Lan, T. (2023) Elastic impedance inversion incorporating fusion initial model and kernel Fisher discriminant analysis approach. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 220, 111235.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Lang, X. & Grana, D. (2016) Geostatistical inversion of prestack seismic data for the joint estimation of facies and impedances using stochastic sampling from Gaussian mixture posterior distributions. Geophysics, 82(4), M55–M65.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Li, C. & Liu, X. (2022) Sparse seismic reflectivity inversion using an adaptive fast iterative shrinkage‐thresholding algorithm. Geophysical Prospecting, 70(6), 1003–1015.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Li, J., Wei, C., Ma, X. & Yu, H. (2015) Application of sequence stratigraphy framework in improving the precision of seismic inversion. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2015. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2733–2737.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Li, S., Yin, H. & Fang, L. (2013) Remote sensing image fusion via sparse representations over learned dictionaries. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 51(9), 4779–4789.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Luo, C., Ba, J., Huang, G. & Carcione, J.M. (2021) A Born‐WKBJ pre‐stack seismic inversion based on a 3D structural‐geology model building. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 60, 1–11.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Mahmoodi, O., Smith, R.S. & Spicer, B. (2017) Using constrained inversion of gravity and magnetic field to produce a 3D litho‐prediction model. Geophysical Prospecting, 65(6), 1662–1679.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Mallick, S. & Ng, P. (1995) A comparison of poststack and prestack inversion of seismic data. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 651–654.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Ovcharenko, O., Kazei, V., Kalita, M., Peter, D. & Alkhalifah, T. (2019) Deep learning for low‐frequency extrapolation from multioffset seismic data. Geophysics, 84(6), R989–R1001.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Ovcharenko, O., Kazei, V., Plotnitskiy, P., Peter, D., Silvestrov, I., Bakulin, A. & Alkhalifah, T. (2020) Extrapolating low‐frequency prestack land data with deep learning. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2020. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1546–1550.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Posamentier, H.W. & James, D.P. (1993) An overview of sequence‐stratigraphic concepts: uses and abuses. In: Posamentier, H.W., Summerhayes, C.P., Haq, B.U. & Allen, G.P. (Eds.) Sequence stratigraphy and facies associations. New York: Wiley, pp. 1–18.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Pérez, D.O., Velis, D.R. & Sacchi, M.D. (2013) High‐resolution prestack seismic inversion using a hybrid FISTA least‐squares strategy. Geophysics, 78(5), R185–R195.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Ray, A.K. & Chopra, S. (2015) More robust methods of low‐frequency model building for seismic impedance inversion. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2015. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 3398–3402.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Re, S. (2018) Building the initial velocity model for refraction tomography: a data‐driven approach. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts, 5173–5177.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Richards, P.G. & Aki, K. (1980) Quantitative seismology: Theory and methods. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Roy, B., Anno, P. & Gurch, M. (2008) Imaging oil‐sand reservoir heterogeneities using wide‐angle prestack seismic inversion. The Leading Edge, 27(9), 1192–1201.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Sen, M.K. & Roy, I.G. (2003) Computation of differential seismograms and iteration adaptive regularization in prestack waveform inversion. Geophysics, 68(6), 2026–2039.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. She, B., Wang, Y., Liang, J. & Hu, G. (2019) Data‐driven simultaneous seismic inversion of multiparameters via collaborative sparse representation. Geophysical Journal International, 218(1), 313–332.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. She, B., Wang, Y., Liang, J., Liu, Z., Song, C. & Hu, G. (2018) A data‐driven amplitude variation with offset inversion method via learned dictionaries and sparse representation. Geophysics, 83(6), R725–R748.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. She, B., Wang, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, J. & Hu, G. (2019) AVO inversion with high‐order total variation regularization. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 161, 167–181.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Srivastava, R.P. & Sen, M.K. (2010) Stochastic inversion of prestack seismic data using fractal‐based initial models. Geophysics, 75(3), R47–R59.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Sun, J. & Li, Y. (2014) Adaptive Lp$L_p$ inversion for simultaneous recovery of both blocky and smooth features in a geophysical model. Geophysical Journal International, 197(2), 882–899.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. ten Kroode, F., Bergler, S., Corsten, C., de Maag, J.W., Strijbos, F. & Tijhof, H. (2013) Broadband seismic data ‐ The importance of low frequencies. Geophysics, 78(2), WA3–WA14.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Tian, K., Zhang, X., Wang, C. & Zhu, L. (2018) Study and application of velocity model construction method in depth domain based on constraint of well and horizon. In: SEG global meeting abstracts. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 532–535.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Tian, L., Li, D., Zhou, D., Jiang, L. & Jiang, B. (2014) The effect of initial models on seismic impedance inversion accuracy based on model. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2014. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 3252–3256.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Valenciano, A.A., Biondi, B. & Guitton, A. (2006) Target‐oriented wave‐equation inversion. Geophysics, 71(4), A35–A38.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Voisey, S. & Monk, D. (2015) The building and application of seismic interval velocity used as an initial model in a pre‐stack seismic inversion. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2015. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 3403–3407.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Wang, G., Yuan, S., Wei, W., Wang, S. & Ye, X. (2017) Building good initial model for full‐waveform inversion using frequency shift filter. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2017. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1319–1323.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Wang, Y., Wang, X. & Shen, G. (2009) Pre‐stack multi‐angle three‐parameter synchronous inversion method. In: SEG global meeting abstracts. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 258–258.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Wang, Y., Xin, K., She, B., Liu, Y., Chen, T., Hu, G. & Wu, Q. (2021) Mixed Gaussian stochastic inversion based on hybrid of Cuckoo algorithm and Markov chain Monte Carlo. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(7), 2540–2553 (in Chinese).
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Wang, Y., Zhang, G., Li, H., Yang, W. & Wang, W. (2022) The high‐resolution seismic deconvolution method based on joint sparse representation using logging–seismic data. Geophysical Prospecting, 70(8), 1313–1326.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Wang, Z., Gao, J., Zhao, H. & Zhao, X. (2023) Three‐parameter prestack nonlinear inversion constrained by gradient structure similarity. Geophysics, 88(1), N1–N19.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Wang, Y., Zhang, G., Chen, T., Liu, Y., Shen, B., Liang, J. & Hu, G. (2023) Data and model dual‐driven seismic deconvolution via error‐constrained joint sparse representation. Geophysics, 88(4), V345–V359.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Wu, Q., Zhu, Z., Yan, X. & Gong, W. (2019) An improved particle swarm optimization algorithm for AVO elastic parameter inversion problem. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 31(9), e4987.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Yan, Z. & Gu, H. (2013) Non‐linear prestack seismic inversion with global optimization using an edge‐preserving smoothing filter. Geophysical Prospecting, 61(4), 747–760.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Yu, B., Zhou, H., Wang, L. & Liu, W. (2020) Prestack Bayesian statistical inversion constrained by reflection features. Geophysics, 85(4), R349–R363.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Yuan, S., Wang, S., Luo, Y., Wei, W. & Wang, G. (2019) Impedance inversion by using the low‐frequency full‐waveform inversion result as an a priori model. Geophysics, 84(2), R149–R164.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Zhang, J., Zhao, X., Chen, Y. & Hui, S. (2023) Domain knowledge‐guided data‐driven prestack seismic inversion using deep learning. Geophysics, 88(2), M31–M47.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Zhang, Y., Zhu, X. & Gao, J. (2023) Seismic inversion based on acoustic wave equations using physics‐informed neural network. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61, 1–11.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Zhao, C. & Zhang, G. (2016) The prestack seismic stochastic inversion based on quantum Metropolis–Hastings method. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 562–566.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13558
Loading
An initial model construction method constrained by stratigraphic sequence representation for pre‐stack seismic inversion
Geophysical Prospecting 72, 2829 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13558
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13558
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13558
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): collaborative sparse representation; initial model; inversion; modelling; pre‐stack seismic inversion; seismics; signal processing; stratigraphic sequence

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