1887
Volume 73, Issue 4
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

Source time‐reversal imaging based on wave equation theory can achieve high‐precision source location in complex geological models. For the time‐reversal imaging method, the imaging condition is critical to the location accuracy and imaging resolution. The most commonly used imaging condition in time‐reversal imaging is the scalar cross correlation imaging condition. However, scalar cross‐correlation imaging condition removes the directional information of the wavefield through modulus operations to avoid the direct dot product of mutually orthogonal P‐ and S‐waves, preventing the imaging condition from leveraging the wavefield propagation direction to suppress imaging artefacts. We previously tackled this issue by substituting the imaging wavefield with the energy current density vectors of the decoupled wavefield, albeit at the cost of increased computational and storage demands. To balance artifact suppression with reduced computational and memory overhead, this work introduces the Poynting and polarization vectors mixed imaging condition. Poynting and polarization vectors mixed imaging condition utilizes the polarization and propagation direction information of the wavefield by directly dot multiplying the undecoupled velocity polarization vector with the Poynting vector, eliminating the need for P‐ and S‐wave decoupling or additional memory. Compared with scalar cross‐correlation imaging condition, this imaging condition can accurately image data with lower signal‐to‐noise ratios. Its performance is generally consistent with previous work but offers higher computational efficiency and lower memory usage. Synthetic data tests on the half‐space model and the three‐dimensional Marmousi model demonstrate the effectiveness of this method in suppressing imaging artefacts, as well as its efficiency and ease of implementation.

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

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13649
2025-04-17
2026-02-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13649
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Artman, B., Podladtchikov, I. & Witten, B. (2010) Source location using time‐reverse imaging: source location using time‐reverse imaging. Geophysical Prospecting, 58, 861–873. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2478.2010.00911.x
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Barati, R. & Liang, J.‐T. (2014) A review of fracturing fluid systems used for hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 131(16), 40735. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/app.40735
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Cai, A. & Zelt, C.A. (2022) Early arrival waveform inversion using data uncertainties and matching filters with application to near‐surface seismic refraction data. Geophysics, 87, R465–R486. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2022‐0048.1
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Chambers, K., Kendall, J.‐M., Brandsberg‐Dahl, S. & Rueda, J. (2010) Testing the ability of surface arrays to monitor microseismic activity. Geophysical Prospecting, 58, 821–830. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2478.2010.00893.x
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen, J., Zelt, C.A. & Jaiswal, P. (2016) Detecting a known near‐surface target through application of frequency‐dependent traveltime tomography and full‐waveform inversion to P‐ and SH‐wave seismic refraction data. Geophysics, 82, R1–R17. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016‐0085.1
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Crice, D.B., Lambert, M., Evans, R. & Morton, P. (2013) Deploying wireless seismic recording systems for real‐time monitoring and analysis of hydraulic fracturing projects. Presented at the 4th EAGE passive seismic workshop. European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.20142367
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Du, Q., Zhu, Y. & Ba, J. (2012) Polarity reversal correction for elastic reverse time migration. Geophysics, 77, S31–S41. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2011‐0348.1
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Finger, C. & Saenger, E.H. (2021) Determination of the time‐dependent moment tensor using time reverse imaging. Geophysics, 86, KS63–KS77. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2020‐0348.1
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Gajewski, D. & Tessmer, E. (2005) Reverse modelling for seismic event characterization. Geophysical Journal International, 163, 276–284. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2005.02732.x
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Gardner, G.H.F., Gardner, L.W. & Gregory, A.R. (1974) Formation velocity and density; the diagnostic basics for stratigraphic traps. Geophysics, 39, 770–780. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440465
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Hu, N., Zhang, W., Xu, J., Yang, H. & Li, Y. (2023) P‐ and S‐wave energy current density vectors dot product imaging condition of source time‐reversal imaging. Geophysical Journal International, 234, 2180–2198. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggad196
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Jianlei, Z., Zhenping, T., Chengxiang, W. (2007) P‐ and S‐wave‐separated elastic wave‐equation numerical modeling using 2D staggered grid. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2007. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2104–2109. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2792904
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Larmat, C., Montagner, J.‐P., Fink, M., Capdeville, Y., Tourin, A. & Clévédé, E. (2006) Time‐reversal imaging of seismic sources and application to the great Sumatra earthquake. Geophysical Research Letters, 33(19), L19312. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL026336
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Larmat, C., Tromp, J., Liu, Q. & Montagner, J.‐P. (2008) Time reversal location of glacial earthquakes. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth113, B09314. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JB005607
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Larmat, C.S., Guyer, R.A. & Johnson, P.A. (2009) Tremor source location using time reversal: selecting the appropriate imaging field. Geophysical Research Letters, 36(22), L22304. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL040099
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Lellouch, A., Lindsey, N.J., Ellsworth, W.L. & Biondi, B.L. (2020) Comparison between distributed acoustic sensing and geophones: Downhole microseismic monitoring of the FORGE geothermal experiment. Seismological Research Letters, 91, 3256–3268. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1785/0220200149
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Li, J., Shen, Y. & Zhang, W. (2018) Three‐dimensional passive‐source reverse‐time migration of converted waves: the method. Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth, 123(2), 1419–1434. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JB014817
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Li, L., Chen, H. & Wang, X.‐M. (2015) Weighted‐elastic‐wave interferometric imaging of microseismic source location. Applied Geophysics, 12, 221–234. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11770‐015‐0479‐z
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Li, M., Li, H., Tao, G., Ali, M. & Guo, Y. (2019) Microseismic event location using multi‐scale time reversed imaging. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 174, 144–160. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.11.015
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Li, Z.C., Yong, P. & Huang, J.P. (2016) Elastic wave reverse time migration based on vector wavefield seperation. Journal of China University of Petroleum (in Chinese), 40, 42–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Liang, C., Yu, Y., Yang, Y., Kang, L., Yin, C. & Wu, F. (2016) Joint inversion of source location and focal mechanism of microseismicity. Geophysics, 81, KS41–KS49. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2015‐0272.1
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Liu, F., Zhang, G., Morton, S.A. & Leveille, J.P. (2011) An effective imaging condition for reverse‐time migration using wavefield decomposition. Geophysics, 76, S29–S39. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3533914
     [Google Scholar]
  23. McMechan, G.A. (1982) Determination of source parameters by wavefield extrapolation. Geophysical Journal International, 71, 613–628. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.1982.tb02788.x
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Nakata, N. & Beroza, G.C. (2016) Reverse time migration for microseismic sources using the geometric mean as an imaging condition. Geophysics, 81, KS51–KS60. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2015‐0278.1
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Rietbrock, A. & Scherbaum, F. (1994) Acoustic imaging of earthquake sources from the Chalfant Valley, 1986, aftershock series. Geophysical Journal International, 119, 260–268. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.1994.tb00926.x
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Steiner, B., Saenger, E.H. & Schmalholz, S.M. (2008) Time reverse modeling of low‐frequency microtremors: application to hydrocarbon reservoir localization. Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L03307. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032097
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Tang, H.‐G., He, B.‐S. & Mou, H.‐B. (2016) P‐ and S‐wave energy flux density vectors. Geophysics, 81, T357–T368. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016‐0245.1
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Werner, C. & Saenger, E.H. (2018) Obtaining reliable source locations with time reverse imaging: limits to array design, velocity models and signal‐to‐noise ratios. Solid Earth, 9, 1487–1505. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5194/se‐9‐1487‐2018
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Wu, S., Wang, Y., Xie, F. & Chang, X. (2021) Crosscorrelation migration of microseismic source locations with hybrid imaging condition. Geophysics, 87, KS17–KS31. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2020‐0896.1
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Xiao, X. & Leaney, W.S. (2010) Local vertical seismic profiling (VSP) elastic reverse‐time migration and migration resolution: salt‐flank imaging with transmitted P‐to‐S waves. Geophysics, 75, S35–S49. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3309460
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Xie, C., Qin, Z.‐L., Wang, J.‐H., Song, P., Shen, H.‐G., Yu, S.‐Q. et al. (2024) Full waveform inversion based on hybrid gradient. Petroleum Science, 21, 1660–1670. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petsci.2024.01.013
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Xie, C., Song, P., Li, X., Tan, J., Wang, S. & Zhao, B. (2021) Least‐squares reverse time migration using the gradient preconditioning based on transmitted wave energy. Frontiers in Earth Science, 9, 732425. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2021.732425
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Xie, C., Wang, J., Song, P., Tan, J., Liu, Z. & Wang, Y. (2024) Elastic reverse time migration based on first‐order velocity‐dilatation‐rotation equations using the optical flow vector. Geophysics, 89, S325–S337. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2023‐0198.1
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Xing, G. & Zhu, T. (2023) Compensating attenuation effects in full‐waveform inversion with dissipation‐dispersion decoupling. Geophysics, 88, R645–R654. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2022‐0614.1
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Yang, J. & Zhu, H. (2019) Locating and monitoring microseismicity, hydraulic fracture and earthquake rupture using elastic time‐reversal imaging. Geophysical Journal International, 216, 726–744. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggy460
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Yoon, K. & Marfurt, K.J. (2006) Reverse‐time migration using the Poynting vector. Exploration Geophysics, 37, 102–107. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1071/eg06102
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Yu, Y., Liang, C., Wu, F., Wang, X., Yu, G. & Chu, F. (2018) On the accuracy and efficiency of the joint source scanning algorithm for hydraulic fracturing monitoring. Geophysics, 83, KS77–KS85. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2017‐0473.1
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Zhang, J., Tian, Z. & Wang, C. (2007) P‐ and S‐wave‐separated elastic wave‐equation numerical modeling using 2D staggered grid. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2007. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2104–2109. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2792904
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhang, Q., Zhang, W., Wu, X., Zhang, J., Kuang, W. & Si, X. (2022) Deep learning for efficient microseismic location using source migration‐based imaging. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127, e2021JB022649. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JB022649
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Zhang, W. & Chen, X. (2006) Traction image method for irregular free surface boundaries in finite difference seismic wave simulation. Geophysical Journal International, 167, 337–353. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2006.03113.x
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Zhou, H.‐W., Hu, H., Zou, Z., Wo, Y. & Youn, O. (2018) Reverse time migration: a prospect of seismic imaging methodology. Earth‐Science Reviews, 179, 207–227. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.02.008
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Zhou, Y., Zhang, Q. & Zhang, W. (2022) PS interferometric imaging condition for microseismic source elastic time‐reversal imaging. Geophysical Journal International, 229, 505–521. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggab504
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13649
Loading
Poynting and polarization vectors mixed imaging condition of source time‐reversal imaging
Geophysical Prospecting 73, 1037 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13649
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13649
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13649
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): imaging; monitoring; multicomponent; passive method

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