Land 3D Acquisition Design: Theory of Wavefield Sampling. Part 1: Past 3D Design Testing and Assessment of Cross-Spread and Parallel Geometries

References

1. AnsteyN., Whatever happened to ground roll?TLE March 1986, 40–45.
   [Google Scholar]
2. BouskaJ., Cut to the Quick: Investigating the Effects of Reduced Surface Sampling in 3D Data Acquisition; 1995 CSEG Convention.
   [Google Scholar]
3. CamboisG., AVO and the general inverse theory; CSEG Recorder2001.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Crews, G., Musser, J. and Phillips, H., Economical high-resolution 3D seismic survey technique without interpolation; 1991SEG Ann. Mtg. Abstracts, 754–756.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Crook, A. [2022]. Evaluating Seismic Acquisition Techniques for Reduced Environmental Impact; Second EAGE Workshop on Near-Surface and Mineral Exploration in Latin America, Bogotá, Colombia, Abstract.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Crook, A., Naghizadeh, M., Montano, M., Birce, A. and Hons, M. [2023]. Choosing the Right Seismic Acquisition Geometry for Your Survey: Line Intervals & Distribution Comparison;GeoConvention 2023 abstracts.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Duncan, E., O’Byrne, A. and Dalsin, J. [2014]. Real vs. ‘5D’ Data: An analysis of acquired vs. interpolated data in both the post-stack and the pre-stack domains for parallel and orthogonal geometries;CSEG Recorder2014, 39(3).
   [Google Scholar]
8. Freeland, J., and Hogg, J., What does Migration do to Seismic Resolution; Sept. & Oct.CSEG Recorder1990.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Gardner, G. and Canning, A. [1994]. Effects of irregular sampling on 3D prestack migration;SEG Ann. Mtg. Abstracts, 1553–56.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Goodway, W., and Ragan, B. [1996]. “Mega-Bin”: Toward a cost effective “near symmetric patch geometry for improved S/N & resolution from regular acquisition sampling and co-operative image processing;CSEG convention abstracts p 99–102.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Goodway, W., and Ragan, B. [1996]. MegaBin patent “Three-dimensional seismic acquisition” awarded to PanCanadian; patent number 5787051.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Goodway, W., Chen, T. and J.Downton, [1997]. Improved AV O fluid detection and lithology discrimination using Lamé parameters; lr, mr and l/m fluid stack from P and S inversions;CSEG National Convention Expanded Abstracts148–151.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Goodway, W., AVO and Lamé constants for rock parameterization and fluid detection; CSEG Recorder June 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Goodway, W. [2013]. Cost efficient acquisition to reduce coarse land 3D line spacings through beyond Nyquist interpolation and wavefield reconstruction for signal and noise;CSEG convention abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Hons, M., Naghizadeh, M. and Kolesar, R. [2023]. What does Fresnel Fold mean?;GeoConvention 2023 abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Lindsey, J.The Fresnel zone and its interpretive significance; TLE October 1989, 33–39.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Liu, B., and Sacchi, M. [2004]. Minimum weighted norm interpolation of seismic records;Geophysics, 69, 1560–1568.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Monk, D. J. [2009]. Fresnel zone binning: Application to 3D seismic fold and coverage assessment;TLE, 28(3), 288–295.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Monk, D. J. [2010]. Fresnel zone binning: Fresnel-zone shape with offset and velocity function;Geophysics, 75(1), T9–T14.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Monk, D. J. [2020]. Survey design and seismic acquisition for land, marine, and in-between in light of new technology and techniques; SEG, Distinguished Instructor Series, 23.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Naghizadeh, M. [2012]. Seismic data interpolation and denoising in the frequency-wavenumber domain, Geophysics, 77, V71–V80.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Naghizadeh, M. [2015]. Double-weave 3D seismic acquisition — Part 1: Sampling and sparse Fourier reconstruction;Geophysics, 80, WD143–WD162.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Naghizadeh, M. and Sacchi, M. [2007]. Multistep autoregressive reconstruction of seismic records, Geophysics, 72, V111–V118.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Naghizadeh, M. and Sacchi, M. [2013]. Multidimensional de-aliased Cadzow reconstruction of seismic records, Geophysics, 78, A1–A5.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Naghizadeh, M., Vermeulen, P., Crook, A., Birce, A., Ross, S., Stanton, A., Rodriguez, M. and Cookson, W. [2023]. “EcoSeis”: A novel acquisition method for optimizing seismic resolution while minimizing environmental footprint;TLE42: 61–68.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Naghizadeh, M., Crook, A. and Bossaer, S. [2022]. Optimal infilling of seismic stations using Fresnel zone binning analysis;SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts: 75–79.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Neidell, N., Sampling 3D seismic surveys: A conjecture favouring coarser but higher-fold sampling; TLE, July 1994, 764–768.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Rigdon, K., [1995]. Designing Full Azimuth 3D Seismic Surveys;CSEG. Convention Abstracts, 94–95.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Ronen, S., Handling irregular geometry: Equalized DMO and beyond; 1994SEG Ann. Mtg. L.A., Expanded Abstracts, 1545–1548
    [Google Scholar]
30. Spitz, S., Seismic trace interpolation in the FX domain; 1991, Geophysics, 56, 785–794
    [Google Scholar]
31. Trad, D., Deere, J. and Cheadle, S. [2005]. Understanding land data interpolation: 75th Annual International Meeting; SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 2158–2161.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Trad, D., [2009]. Five-dimensional interpolation: Recovering from acquisition constraints; Geophysics, 74, V123–V132.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Vermeer, G., 3D Symmetric sampling; 1994SEG Ann. Mtg. Expanded Abstracts, 906–909.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Vermeer, G., 3D Symmetric sampling in Land Data Acquisition; 1995CSEG Annual Convention Abstracts,169–170.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Vermeer, G., 3D Seismic survey design; 2002SEG Geophysical Reference Series No. 12.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Vermeer, G., Comments on Fresnel zone binning — Can it be used to determine maximum allowable holes in coverage of long offsets?TLE June 2022, 418–420.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Vermeulen, P., A.Crook, M.Naghizadeh, and S.Ross, Turn your seismic program into a lean, green, resolution machine; GeoConvention conference abstracts; Calgary 2022.
    [Google Scholar]