1887

Abstract

Summary

Industrial geoscience is entering the age of ‘big data’, in which the data volumes routinely acquired for analysis are so large that they can no longer be processed by traditional workflows. How can we store and mine this deluge of information?

In this article, we focus on model-oriented design and analysis (MODA) -- the theory and practice of designing experiments to maximize the information expected in data observations. MODA is appealing because it is an optimization method, which offers confidence in the expected results, and because it can be applied before or after data acquisition, to either forecast the most informative data to acquire or to optimally select data from existing datasets. MODA reduces costs by increasing efficiency in either scenario, whether through data acquisition or data processing.

However, MODA is itself challenged by the computational demands of big data, and researchers are seeking ways to reduce its computational cost. One novel possibility is dimension reduction – especially if it is parallelizable. We develop a dimension reduction workflow for guided Bayesian survey design – a linearized MODA technique – that greatly reduces the computing cost of optimal survey design, and we demonstrate its utility on a real, industrial-scale marine seismic design problem.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20140632
2014-06-16
2024-04-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atkinson, A.C., Donev, A.N. and Tobias, R.D.
    [2007] Optimum experimental designs, with SAS, vol. 34. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Djikpesse, H.A., Khodja, M.R., Prange, M.D., Duchenne, S. and Menkiti, H.
    [2012] Bayesian survey design to optimize resolution in waveform inversion. Geophysics, 77(2), R81–R93.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Fedorov, V.V. and Hackl, P.
    [1997] Model-oriented design of experiments. 125, Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Golub, G.H. and Van Loan, C.F.
    [1996] Matrix computations. Johns Hopkins University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Gu, M. and Eisenstat, S.C.
    [1996] Efficient Algorithms for Computing a Strong Rank-Revealing QR Factorization. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 17(4), 848–869.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Habashy, T.M., Abubakar, A., Pan, G. and Belani, A.
    [2011] Source-receiver compression scheme for full-waveform seismic inversion. Geophysics, 76(4), R95–R108.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Herrmann, F.J.
    [2010] Randomized sampling and sparsity: Getting more information from fewer samples. Geophysics, 75(6), WB173–WB187.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Khodja, M.R., Prange, M.D. and Djikpesse, H.A.
    [2010] Guided Bayesian optimal experimental design. Inverse Problems, 26, 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Krebs, J.R. et al.
    [2009] Fast full-wavefield seismic inversion using encoded sources. Geophysics, 74(6), WCC177–WCC188.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Maurer, H., Curtis, A. and Boerner, D.
    [2010] Recent advances in optimized geophysical survey design. Geophysics, 75(5), 75A177–75A194.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Tarantola, A.
    [2005] Inverse problem theory, vol. 130. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. WesternGeco
    WesternGeco [2013] Dual Coil Shooting Multivessel Full-Azimuth Acquisition, http://www.slb.com/services/westerngeco/services/marine/techniques_enabled/dualcoilshooting.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20140632
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20140632
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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