1887
Volume 72, Issue 9
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Time‐lapse images carry out important information about dynamic changes in Earth's interior, which can be inferred using different full waveform inversion schemes. The estimation process is performed by manipulating more than one seismic dataset, associated with the baseline and monitors surveys. The time‐lapse variations can be so minute and localized that quantifying the uncertainties becomes fundamental to assessing the reliability of the results. The Bayesian formulation of the full waveform inversion problem naturally provides confidence levels in the solution, but evaluating the uncertainty of time‐lapse seismic inversion remains a challenge due to the ill‐posedness and high dimensionality of the problem. The Hamiltonian Monte Carlo can effectively sample over high‐dimensional distributions with affordable computational efforts. In this context, we explore the sequential approach in a Bayesian fashion for time‐lapse full waveform inversion using the Hamiltonian Monte Carlo method. The idea relies on integrating the baseline survey information as prior knowledge to the monitor estimation. We compare this methodology with a parallel scheme in perfect and a simple perturbed acquisition geometry scenario considering the Marmousi and a typical Brazilian pre‐salt velocity model. We also investigate the correlation effect between baseline and monitor samples on the propagated uncertainties. The results show that samples between different surveys are weakly correlated in the sequential case, while the parallel strategy provides time‐lapse images with lower dispersion. Our findings demonstrate that both methodologies are robust in providing uncertainties even in non‐repeatable scenarios.

© 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2024 The Author(s). Geophysical Prospecting published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13604
2024-10-11
2026-02-14

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13604
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/gpr/72/9/gpr13604.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13604&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aleardi, M. & Salusti, A. (2020) Hamiltonian Monte Carlo algorithms for target‐ and interval‐oriented amplitude versus angle inversions. Geophysics, 85, R177–R194.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Aleardi, M., Salusti, A. & Pierini, S. (2020) Transdimensional and Hamiltonian Monte Carlo inversions of Rayleigh‐wave dispersion curves: a comparison on synthetic datasets. Near Surface Geophysics, 18(5), 515–543. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/nsg.12100
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Asnaashari, A., Brossier, R., Garambois, S., Audebert, F., Thore, P. & Virieux, J. (2012) Time‐lapse imaging using regularized FWI: a robustness study. In SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2012. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1–5. https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/segam2012‐0699.1
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Asnaashari, A., Brossier, R., Garambois, S., Audebert, F., Thore, P. & Virieux, J. (2013) Regularized seismic full waveform inversion with prior model information. Geophysics, 78(2), R25–R36. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2012‐0104.1
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Asnaashari, A., Brossier, R., Garambois, S., Audebert, F., Thore, P. & Virieux, J. (2015) Time‐lapse seismic imaging using regularized full‐waveform inversion with a prior model: Which strategy?Geophysical Prospecting, 63(1), 78–98. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1365‐2478.12176
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bayes, M. & Price, M. (1763) LII. An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. By the late Rev. Mr. Bayes, F. R. S. communicated by Mr. Price, in a letter to John Canton, A. M. F. R. S. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 53, 370–418. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/abs/10.1098/rstl.1763.0053
  7. Berti, S., Aleardi, M. & Stucchi, E. (2024) A computationally efficient Bayesian approachto full‐waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 72, 580–603. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365‐2478.13437
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Betancourt, M. (2018) A conceptual introduction to Hamiltonian Monte Carlo.
  9. Biswas, R. & Sen, M.K. (2022) Transdimensional 2D full‐waveform inversion and uncertainty estimation.
  10. Bodin, T., Sambridge, M., Rawlinson, N. & Arroucau, P. (2012) Transdimensional tomography with unknown data noise. Geophysical Journal International, 189(3), 1536–1556. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2012.05414.x
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Brooks, S., Gelman, A., Jones, G. & Meng, X.‐L. (2011) Handbook of Markov chain Monte Carlo. London: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Brossier, R., Operto, S. & Virieux, J. (2010) Which data residual norm for robust elastic frequency‐domain full waveform inversion?Geophysics, 75(3), R37–R46. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3379323
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Buland, A. & Ouair, Y.E. (2006) Bayesian time‐lapse inversion. Geophysics, 71(3), R43–R48. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2196874
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Carvalho, P.T.C., da Silva, S.L.E.F., Duarte, E.F., Brossier, R., Corso, G. & de Araújo, J.M. (2021) Full waveform inversion based on the non‐parametric estimate of the probability distribution of the residuals. Geophysical Journal International, 229(1), 35–55. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggab441
     [Google Scholar]
  15. da Silva, S.L., Costa, F., Karsou, A., Capuzzo, F., Moreira, R., Lopez, J. & Cetale, M. (2024) Research note: Application of refraction full‐waveform inversion of ocean bottom node data using a squared‐slowness model parameterization. Geophysical Prospecting, 72(3), 1189–1195. https://www.earthdoc.org/content/journals/10.1111/1365‐2478.13454
     [Google Scholar]
  16. da Silva, S.L.E.F., Karsou, A., de Souza, A., Capuzzo, F., Costa, F., Moreira, R. & Cetale, M. (2022) A graph‐space optimal transport objective function based on q‐statistics to mitigate cycle‐skipping issues in FWI. Geophysical Journal International, 231(2), 1363–1385. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggac267
     [Google Scholar]
  17. de Lima, P.D., Ferreira, M.S., Corso, G. & de Araújo, J.M. (2023) Bayesian sequential time‐lapse full waveform inversion. In 5th EAGE Conference on Petroleum Geostatistics. Houten, the Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1–5. https://www.earthdoc.org/content/papers/10.3997/2214‐4609.202335047
     [Google Scholar]
  18. de Lima, P.D.S., Corso, G., Ferreira, M.S. & de Araújo, J.M. (2023) Acoustic full waveform inversion with Hamiltonian Monte Carlo method. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 617, 128618. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437123001735
     [Google Scholar]
  19. de Oliveira Werneck, R., Prates, R., Moura, R., Gonçalves, M.M., Castro, M., Soriano‐Vargas, A., Ribeiro Mendes Júnior, P., Hossain, M.M., Zampieri, M.F., Ferreira, A., Davólio, A., Schiozer, D. & Rocha, A. (2022) Data‐driven deep‐learning forecasting for oil production and pressure. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 210, 109937. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920410521015515
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Dhabaria, N. & Singh, S.C. (2024) Hamiltonian Monte Carlo based elastic full‐waveform inversion of wide‐angle seismic data. Geophysical Journal International, 237(3), 1384–1399. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggae112
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Duane, S., Kennedy, A., Pendleton, B.J. & Roweth, D. (1987) Hybrid Monte Carlo. Physics Letters B, 195(2), 216–222. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/037026938791197X
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Eikrem, K.S., Nævdal, G. & Jakobsen, M. (2019) Iterated extended Kalman filter method for time‐lapse seismic full‐waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 67(2), 379–394. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1365‐2478.12730
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Fichtner, A. & Simutė, S. (2018) Hamiltonian Monte Carlo inversion of seismic sources in complex media. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 123, 2984–2999. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/2017JB015249
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Fichtner, A., Zunino, A. & Gebraad, L. (2018) Hamiltonian Monte Carlo solution of tomographic inverse problems. Geophysical Journal International, 216(2), 1344–1363. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggy496
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Fichtner, A., Zunino, A., Gebraad, L. & Boehm, C. (2021) Autotuning Hamiltonian Monte Carlo for efficient generalized nullspace exploration. Geophysical Journal International, 227(2), 941–968. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggab270
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Gebraad, L., Boehm, C. & Fichtner, A. (2020) Bayesian elastic full‐waveform inversion using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 125(3), e2019JB018428. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2019JB018428
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Gineste, M., Eidsvik, J. & Zheng, Y. (2019) Ensemble‐based seismic inversion for a stratified medium. Geophysics, 85(1), R29–R39. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2019‐0017.1
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Hochwart, B., da Silva, S.L.E., Cetale, M. & Moreira, R.M. (2024) Assessing time‐lapse full‐waveform inversion strategies in a Brazilian pre‐salt setting. Brazilian Journal of Geophysics, 42(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.22564/brjg.v41i2.2308
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Huang, X. (2023) Full wavefield inversion with multiples: nonlinear Bayesian inverse multiple scattering theory beyond the born approximation. Geophysics, 88(6), T289–T303. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2022‐0604.1
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Huang, X., Eikrem, K.S., Jakobsen, M. & Nævdal, G. (2020) Bayesian full‐waveform inversion in anisotropic elastic media using the iterated extended Kalman filter. Geophysics, 85(4), C125–C139. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2019‐0644.1
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Izzatullah, M., van Leeuwen, T. & Peter, D. (2021) Bayesian seismic inversion: a fast sampling Langevin dynamics Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Geophysical Journal International, 227(3), 1523–1553. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggab287
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Kamei, R. & Lumley, D. (2017) Full waveform inversion of repeating seismic events to estimate time‐lapse velocity changes. Geophysical Journal International, 209(2), 1239–1264. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggx057
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Kotsi, M., Malcolm, A. & Ely, G. (2020a) Time‐lapse full‐waveform inversion using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo: a proof of concept. In SEG Technical program expanded abstracts 2020. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 845–849. https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/segam2020‐3422774.1
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Kotsi, M., Malcolm, A. & Ely, G. (2020b) Uncertainty quantification in time‐lapse seismic imaging: a full‐waveform approach. Geophysical Journal International, 222(2), 1245–1263. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa245
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Leimkuhler, B. & Reich, S. (1994) Simulating Hamiltonian systems. New York: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lemos, N.A. (2018) Analytical mechanics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Li, D., Peng, S., Guo, Y., Lu, Y. & Cui, X. (2021) CO2$\rm CO_2$ storage monitoring based on time‐lapse seismic data via deep learning. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 108, 103336. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583621000888
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Li, D., Peng, S., Huang, X., Guo, Y., Lu, Y. & Cui, X. (2021) Time‐lapse full waveform inversion based on curvelet transform: case study of CO2$\rm CO_2$ storage monitoring. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 110, 103417. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583621001699
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Liu, D.C. & Nocedal, J. (1989) On the limited memory BFGS method for large scale optimization. Mathematical Programming, 45(1‐3), 503–528.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Liu, Y., Teng, J., Xu, T., Wang, Y., Liu, Q. & Badal, J. (2016) Robust time‐domain full waveform inversion with normalized zero‐lag cross‐correlation objective function. Geophysical Journal International, 209(1), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw485
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Lopez, J., Neto, F., Cabrera, M., Cooke, S., Grandi, S. & Roehl, D. (2020) Refraction seismic for pre‐salt reservoir characterization and monitoring. In SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2020. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2365–2369. https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/segam2020‐3426667.1
  42. Lumley, D., Adams, D.C., Meadows, M., Cole, S. & Wright, R. (2005) 4D seismic data processing issues and examples. In SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2003. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1394–1397. https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/1.1817550
  43. Lumley, D.E. (2001) Time‐lapse seismic reservoir monitoring. Geophysics, 66(1), 50–53. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444921
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Maharramov, M. & Biondi, B. (2014) Joint full‐waveform inversion of time‐lapse seismic data sets. In SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2014. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 954–959. https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/segam2014‐0962.1
  45. Maharramov, M. & Biondi, B. (2015) Robust simultaneous time‐lapse full‐waveform inversion with total‐variation regularization of model difference. In 77th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2015. Houten, the Netherlands: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, pp. 1–5. https://www.earthdoc.org/content/papers/10.3997/2214‐4609.201413085
  46. Maharramov, M., Biondi, B.L. & Meadows, M.A. (2016) Time‐lapse inverse theory with applications. Geophysics, 81(6), R485–R501. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016‐0131.1
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Mardan, A., Giroux, B. & Fabien‐Ouellet, G. (2023) Weighted‐average time‐lapse seismic full‐waveform inversion. Geophysics, 88(1), R25–R38. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2022‐0090.1
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A.W., Rosenbluth, M.N., Teller, A.H. & Teller, E. (1953) Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 21(6), 1087–1092. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1699114
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Mora, P. (1989) Inversion = migration + tomography. Geophysics, 54(12), 1575–1586. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442625
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Métivier, L., Brossier, R., Mérigot, Q., Oudet, E. & Virieux, J. (2016) Measuring the misfit between seismograms using an optimal transport distance: application to full waveform inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 205(1), 345–377. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw014
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Nakata, R., Jang, U.‐G., Lumley, D., Mouri, T., Nakatsukasa, M., Takanashi, M., & Kato, A. (2022) Seismic time‐lapse monitoring of near‐surface microbubble water injection by full waveform inversion. Geophysical Research Letters, 49(24), e2022GL098734.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Plessix, R. (2006) A review of the adjoint‐state method for computing the gradient of a functional with geophysical applications. Geophysical Journal International, 167(2), 495–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2006.02978.x
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Plessix, R., 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 SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2010. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 930–934.
  54. Routh, P., Palacharla, G., Chikichev, I. & Lazaratos, S. (2012) Full wavefield inversion of time‐lapse data for improved imaging and reservoir characterization. In SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2012. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1–6. https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/segam2012‐1043.1
  55. Sambridge, M. (2013) A parallel tempering algorithm for probabilistic sampling and multimodal optimization. Geophysical Journal International, 196(1), 357–374. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt342
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Sambridge, M. & Mosegaard, K. (2002) Monte Carlo methods in geophysical inverse problems. Reviews of Geophysics, 40(3), 3‐1–3‐29. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2000RG000089
  57. Sen, M.K. & Biswas, R. (2017) Transdimensional seismic inversion using the reversible jump Hamiltonian Monte Carlo algorithm. Geophysics, 82(3), R119–R134. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016‐0010.1
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Sen, M.K. & Stoffa, P.L. (2013) Global optimization methods in geophysical inversion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Tarantola, A. (1984) Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation. Geophysics, 49(8), 1259–1266. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441754
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Tarantola, A. (2004) Inverse problem theory and methods for model parameter estimation. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Thurin, J., Brossier, R. & Métivier, L. (2019) Ensemble‐based uncertainty estimation in full waveform inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 219(3), 1613–1635. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggz384
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Virieux, J. & Operto, S. (2009) An overview of full‐waveform inversion in exploration geophysics. Geophysics, 74(6), WCC1–WCC26. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3238367
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Wang, W., McMechan, G.A. & Ma, J. (2023) Reweighted variational full‐waveform inversions. Geophysics, 88(4), R499–R512. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2021‐0766.1
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Watanabe, T., Shimizu, S., Asakawa, E. & Matsuoka, T. (2005) Differential waveform tomography for time‐lapse crosswell seismic data with application to gas hydrate production monitoring. In SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2004. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2323–2326. https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/1.1845221
  65. Wolpert, D. & Macready, W. (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 67–82.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Yang, D., Liu, F., Morton, S., Malcolm, A. & Fehler, M. (2016) Time‐lapse full‐waveform inversion with ocean‐bottom‐cable data: application on Valhall field. Geophysics, 81(4), R225–R235. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2015‐0345.1
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Yang, D., Meadows, M., Inderwiesen, P., Landa, J., Malcolm, A. & Fehler, M. (2015) Double‐difference waveform inversion: feasibility and robustness study with pressure data. Geophysics, 80(6), M129–M141. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014‐0489.1
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Zhang, X. & Curtis, A. (2020a) Seismic tomography using variational inference methods. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 125(4), e2019JB018589.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Zhang, X. & Curtis, A. (2020b) Variational full‐waveform inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 222(1), 406–411. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa170
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Zhang, X. & Curtis, A. (2021) Bayesian full‐waveform inversion with realistic priors. Geophysics, 86(5), A45–A49. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2021‐0118.1
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Zhang, X. & Curtis, A. (2024) Bayesian variational time‐lapse full waveform inversion. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggae129
  72. Zhang, X., Curtis, A., Galetti, E. & de Ridder, S. (2018) 3‐D Monte Carlo surface wave tomography. Geophysical Journal International, 215(3), 1644–1658. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggy362
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Zhang, X., Lomas, A., Zhou, M., Zheng, Y. & Curtis, A. (2023) 3‐D Bayesian variational full waveform inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 234(1), 546–561. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggad057
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Zhang, X., Roy, C., Curtis, A., Nowacki, A. & Baptie, B. (2020) Imaging the subsurface using induced seismicity and ambient noise: 3‐D tomographic Monte Carlo joint inversion of earthquake body wave traveltimes and surface wave dispersion. Geophysical Journal International, 222(3), 1639–1655.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Zhang, Z. & Huang, L. (2013) Double‐difference elastic‐waveform inversion with prior information for time‐lapse monitoring. Geophysics, 78(6), R259–R273. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2012‐0527.1
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Zheng, Y., Barton, P. & Singh, S. (2012) Strategies for elastic full waveform inversion of time‐lapse ocean bottom cable (OBC) seismic data. In SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2011. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 4195–4200. https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/1.3628083
  77. Zhou, W. & Lumley, D. (2021a) Central‐difference time‐lapse 4D seismic full‐waveform inversion. Geophysics, 86(2), R161–R172. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2019‐0834.1
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Zhou, W. & Lumley, D. (2021b) Non‐repeatability effects on time‐lapse 4d seismic full waveform inversion for ocean‐bottom node data. Geophysics, 86, 1–60.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13604
Loading
Bayesian time‐lapse full waveform inversion using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo
Geophysical Prospecting 72, 3381 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13604
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13604
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13604
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): acoustics; full waveform; inverse problem; time lapse

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