1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 73, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 73, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

Seismic wave forward modelling is a crucial method for studying the propagation characteristics of seismic waves in subsurface media and is a key component of full waveform inversion. Compared to time‐domain forward modelling, frequency‐domain forward modelling offers advantages such as not being constrained by stability limits and reducing the dimension of the solution space. However, forward algorithms based on the rotation coordinate system in the frequency domain cannot adapt to situations with unequal spatial sampling intervals. To enhance the adaptability of the forward modelling algorithm in the frequency domain, we derived a 21‐point finite‐difference scheme based on the average derivative method and calculated the difference coefficients and dispersion conditions. Additionally, to address the significant computational cost in frequency domain forward modelling, we developed an improved 25‐point finite‐difference scheme. The improved 25‐point format is more accurate than the conventional 25‐point format. Building on this foundation, we applied the two derived differential schemes to full waveform inversion to synthesize the shot records of the inversion data. Additionally, we introduced a frequency compensation factor into the gradient processing, which effectively compensates for the deep layer while suppressing noise in the shallow gradient field. Finally, we demonstrated the effectiveness of our approach through a full waveform inversion application on the Marmousi model showcasing its capability in invertig fine subsurface structures.

© 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13587
2025-02-27
2025-03-16

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13587
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alkhalifah, T. (2016) Full waveform inversion in an anisotropic world: where are the parameters hiding. Houten: EAGE Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alkhalifah, T. & Choi, Y. (2014) From tomography to FWI with a single objective function. Geophysics, 79, R55–R61.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Alkhalifah, T., Chao, S., bin Waheed, U. & Hao, Q. (2021) Wavefield solutions from machine learned functions constrained by the Helmholtz equation. Artificial Intelligence in Geosciences, 2, 11–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Brossier, R., Operto, S. & Virieux, J. (2009) Seismic imaging of complex onshore structures by 2D elastic frequency‐domain full‐waveform inversion. Geophysics, 74(6), WCC105–WCC118.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Carey, B., Saleck, F.M., Zaleski, S. & Chavent, G. (1995) Multiscale seismic waveform inversion. Geophysics, 60, 1457–1473.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen, J. (2012) An average‐derivative optimal scheme for frequency‐domain scalar wave equation. Geophysics, 77(6), T201–T210.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, J. (2013) A generalized optimal 9‐point scheme for frequency‐domain scalar wave equation. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 92, 1–7.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Cho, Y., Gibson, R.L., Jun, H. & Shin, C. (2020) Accelerating 2D frequency‐domain full‐waveform inversion via fast wave modeling using a model reduction technique. Geophysics, 85(1), T15–T32.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Devaney, A.J. (1981) Inverse‐scattering theory within the Rytov approximation. Optics Letter, 6(8), 374–376.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Feng, D., Wang, X. & Zhang, B. (2021) A Frequency‐domain Quasi‐Newton‐based biparameter synchronous imaging scheme for ground‐penetrating radar with applications in full waveform inversion. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 59(3), 1949–1966.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Geng, Y., Pan, W. & Innanen, K.A. (2018) Frequency‐domain full‐waveform inversion with non‐linear descent directions. Geophysical Journal International, 213(2), 739–756.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Huang, X. & Greenhalgh, S. (2021) A finite‐difference iterative solver of the Helmholtz equation for frequency‐domain seismic wave modeling and full‐waveform inversion. Geophysics, 86(2), T107–T116.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hu, W., Abubakar, A. & Habashy, T.M. (2009) Simultaneous multifrequency inversion of full‐waveform seismic data. Geophysics, 74(2), R1–R14.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Hu, W., Abubakar, A., Habashy, T.M. & Liu, J. (2011) Preconditioned non‐linear conjugate gradient method for frequency domain full‐waveform seismic inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 59(3), 477–491.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Jang, U., Min, D.J. & Shin, C. (2009) Comparison of scaling methods for waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 57(1), 49–59.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Jo, C.H., Shin, C. & Suh, J.H. (1996) An optimal 9‐point, finite‐difference, frequency‐space, 2‐D scalar wave extrapolator. Geophysics, 61(2), 529–537.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Kim, W.K. & Min, D.J. (2014) A new parameterization for frequency‐domain elastic full waveform inversion for VTI media. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 109, 88–110.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Lailly, P. (1983) The seismic inverse problem as a sequence of before stack migrations. In: Conference on inverse scattering, theory and application, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, expanded abstracts. Philadelphia, SIAM. pp. 206–220.
  19. Li, Q., Wu, G. & Jia, Z. (2022) Frequency domain full waveform inversion based on generalized FD method. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 19, 1–5.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Li, S., Sun, C., Wu, H., Cai, R. & Xu, N. (2021) An optimal finite‐difference method based on the elongated stencil for 2D frequency‐domain acoustic‐wave modeling. Geophysics, 86(6), T523–T541.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Li, S. & Sun, C. (2022) An improved 25‐point finite‐difference scheme for frequency‐domain elastic wave modelling. Geophysical Prospecting, 70(4), 702–724.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Li, Y., Li, Z.C., Zhang, K. & Zhang, X. (2015) Frequency‐domain elastic full‐waveform multiscale inversion method based on dual‐level parallelism. Applied Geophysics, 12(4), 545–554.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Li, Z., Chen, J. & Cao, J. (2020) Frequency‑domain elastic‑wave modeling for polygonal topography using rotated average‑derivative difference operators. Acta Geophysica, 68, 1387–1409.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Mora, P. (1988) Elastic wave‐field inversion of reflection and transmission data. Geophysics, 53(6), 750–759.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Pratt, R.G. (1990a) Inverse theory application to multi‐source cross‐hole tomography. Part2: elastic wave equation method. Geophysical Prospecting, 38(3), 311–329.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Pratt, R.G (1990b) Frequency‐domain elastic wave modeling by finite differences: a tool for crosshole seismic imaging. Geophysics, 55(5), 626–632.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Pratt, R.G. (1999) Seismic waveform inversion in the frequency domain. Partl: theory and verification in a physical scale model. Geophysics, 64(3), 888–901.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Shin, C. & Sohn, H. (1998) A frequency‐space 2‐D scalar wave extrapolator using extended 25‐point finite‐difference operator. Geophysics, 63(1), 289–296.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Sirgue, L. & Pratt, R.G. (2004) Efficient waveform inversion and imaging: a strategy for selecting temporal frequencies. Geophysics, 69(1), 231–248.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Song, Z.M., Williamson, P.R. & Pratt, R.G. (1995) Frequency‐domain acoustic‐wave modeling and inversion of crosshole data: part II—inversion method, synthetic experiments and real‐data results. Geophysics, 60(3), 796–809.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Tarantola, A. (1984) Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation. Geophysics, 49(8), 1259–1266.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Tarantola, A. (1986) A strategy for nonlinear inversion of seismic reflection data. Geophysics, 51(10), 1893–1903.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Wang, Y., Dong, L., Liu, Y. & Yang, J. (2016) 2D frequency‐domain elastic full‐waveform inversion using the block‐diagonal pseudo‐Hessian approximation. Geophysics, 81(5), R247–R259.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Wu, Z. & Alkhalifah, T., (2018) An efficient Helmholtz solver for acoustic transversely isotropic anisotropic media. Geophysics, 83(2), C75–C83.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang, H., Liu, H., Liu, L., Jin, W.‐J. & Shi, X.‐D. (2014) Frequency domain acoustic equation high‐order modeling based on an average‐derivative method (in Chinese)Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 57(5), 1599–1611. Available from: https://doi.org/10.6038/cjg20140523.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Zhang, G., Sun, C., Pan, X., Zhang, Z., Jiang, L. & Yin, X. (2016) Influence factors and strategy of inversion for density of acoustic full waveform inversion with variable density. Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition), 46(5), 1550–1560.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13587
Loading
Average‐derivative optimized 21‐point and improved 25‐point forward modelling and full waveform inversion in frequency domain
Geophysical Prospecting 73, 874 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13587
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13587
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13587
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): average derivative method 21‐point differential format; energy compensation; frequency domain full waveform inversion; improved 25‐point differential format

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