1887
Volume 73, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

We have developed two inversion algorithms to calculate the density ratio across a reflecting interface using Zoeppritz's equation for P‐to‐P wave reflections. At any point on the interface, we can calculate the most likely density ratio value with a corresponding standard deviation from a distribution of estimated (density ratio) values. This makes it possible to plot uncertainty maps at any interface of interest. Both inversion algorithms are applied within the near–far angle range to ensure the reliability of density ratio estimates. Although the methods can theoretically handle a wider range of angles, ultra‐far angles are avoided due to amplitude distortions that become more pronounced at large incidence angles. A natural consequence of this restriction is that the herein‐presented empiricism‐free algorithms can be used for all classes of amplitude variation with offset (AVO) responses. At the heart of the first inversion scheme is a solver of a 12th‐degree polynomial equation. The roots of the equation are calculated at an arbitrary number of incident angles. The solution space gives rise to a distribution from which the most frequent value (representing the maximum of the distribution) is taken as the most likely value. The second scheme involves solving a 5th‐degree polynomial equation for the square of the / ratio of layer 2 (in a two‐layered earth model) also at an arbitrary number of incident angles. The most likely density ratio estimate and the associated uncertainty are obtained as a byproduct of the calculation. We test both methods on a seismic dataset from the Barents Sea. The two methods yield very similar density ratio maps on the studied interface. Moreover, except for one well, they give a good match with estimated values from well‐log data. This study is the second part of a two‐part research. While Part I focuses on the theoretical foundations and synthetic validation of the inversion methods, this paper applies them to real seismic data to evaluate their practical performance.

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

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70030
2025-07-09
2026-02-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70030
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abel, N.H. (1881) [1826] Démonstration de l'impossibilité de la résolution algébrique des équations générales qui passent le quatrième degré. In: Sylow, L & Lie, S (Eds.) Œuvres Complètes de Niels Henrik Abel (in French), vol. I, 2nd ed., Oslo: Grøndahl & Søn, pp. 66–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alqadi, Z. (2018) Salt and pepper noise: effects and removal. International Journal on Electrical Engineering and Informatics, 10, no. 2: 334–347.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Avseth, P., Flesche, H. & van Wijngaarden, A.‐J. (2003) AVO classification of lithology and pore fluids constrained by rock physics depth trends. The Leading Edge, 22(10), 1004–1011.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Avseth, P., Janke, A. & Horn, F. (2016) AVO inversion in exploration—key learnings from a Norwegian Sea prospect. The Leading Edge, 35(5), 405–414. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/tle35050405.1
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Avseth, P., Mukerji, T. & Mavko, G. (2005) Quantitative seismic interpretation—Applying rock physics tools to reduce interpretation risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511600074
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Backus, G.E. (1962) Long‐wave elastic anisotropy produced by horizontal layering. Journal of Geophysical Research, 67, 4427–4440.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Botev, Z.I., Grotowski, J.F. & Kroese, D.P. (2010) Kernel density estimation via diffusion. Annals of Statistics, 38(5), 2916–2957. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1214/10‐AOS799
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chopra, S. & Castagna, J.P. (2014) AVO. Society of Exploration Geophysicists. Investigations in Geophysics No. 16.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Fichtner, A. (2011) Full seismic waveform modelling and inversion. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐642‐15807‐0
     [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.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gubbins, D. (2004) Time series analysis and inverse theory for geophysicists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840302
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Husen, S., Kissling, E., Deichmann, N., Wiemer, S., Giardini, D. & Baer, M. (2003) Probabilistic earthquake location in complex three‐dimensional velocity models: application to Switzerland. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 108(B2): 2077. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JB001778
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Kjølhamar, B. (2015) The hoop area: new testing ground for geophysical technologies. GeoExPro, 12, no. 3: 44–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Kumar, D. (2018) Seismic amplitude calibration for quantitative interpretation. GEOS Alumni Journal, 1, no. 1: 22–29.
  15. Lehocki, I., Avseth, P. & Mondol, N.H. (2020) Seismic methods for fluid discrimination in areas with complex geologic history—a case example from the Barents Sea. Interpretation, 8(1), SA35–SA47. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/INT‐2019‐0057.1
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Lehocki, I., Mukerji, T., Avseth, P. & Jensen, E.H. (2025) Algorithms for extraction of reliable density ratios from prestack seismic data—Part 1 – Theory, Geophysical Prospecting, 1–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Lewis, O.J., Smith, P., Hohner, M., Kvist‐Lassen, T., Dahlhaus, L., Stuberg, L. et al. (2016) Integrated processing of borehole and surface seismic measurements for enhanced well tie and AVO analysis. 78th EAGE conference and exhibition, vol. 2016, 30 May 2 – June 2016. Utrecht, the Netherlands, EAGE. pp. 1–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.201601553
  18. Lomax, A., Virieux, J., Volant, P. & Berge‐Thierry, C. (2000) Probabilistic earthquake location in 3D and layered models. In: Thurber, C.H. & Rabinowitz, N. (Eds.), Advances in seismic event location, vol. 18. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 101–134. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐94‐015‐9536‐0_5
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Munyithya, J.M., Ehirim, C.N., Dagogo, T. & K'orowe, M.O. (2020) Seismic amplitudes and spectral attribute analysis in reservoir characterization, ‘MUN’ onshore Niger delta field. Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology, 10, 2257–2267. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202‐020‐00917‐1
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Shuey, R.T. (1985a) A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations. Geophysics, 50(4), 609–614. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441936
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Shuey, R.T. (1985b) A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations: editor's note. Geophysics, 50(9), 1522. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1442022
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Simm, R. & Bacon, M. (2014) Seismic amplitude. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511984501
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Tarantola, A. & Valette, B. (1982) Inverse problems = quest for information. Journal of Geophysics, 50, 159–170.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Wiggins, R., Kenny, G.S. & McClure, C.D. (1983) A method for determining and displaying the shear‐velocity reflectivities of a geologic formation. European Patent Application, 0113944.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Zoeppritz, K.B. (1919) Über Reflexion und Durchgang seismischer Wellen durch Unstetigkeitsflächen. Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Mathematisch‐Physikalische Klasse, 66–84.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70030
Loading
Algorithms for extraction of reliable density ratios from pre‐stack seismic data—Part 2: Applications
Geophysical Prospecting 73, e70030 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.70030
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70030
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70030
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): density ratio estimation; Zoeppritz inversion

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