Standard seismic processing steps such as velocity analysis and reverse time migration (imaging) usually assume that all reflections are primaries: multiples represent a source of coherent noise and must be suppressed to avoid imaging artefacts. Suppressions methods are relatively ineffective for internal multiples. We show how to predict and remove internal multiples using Marchenko autofocusing and seismic interferometry. We first show how internal multiples can theoretically be reconstructed in convolutional interferometry by combining purely reflected, up- and down- going Green’s functions from virtual sources in the subsurface. We then generate the relevant up- and down-going wavefields at virtual sources along discrete subsurface boundaries using autofocusing. Then, we convolve purely scattered components of up- and down-going Green’s functions to reconstruct only the internal multiple field which is adaptively subtracted from the measured data. Crucially, this is all possible without detailed modelled information about the Earth’s subsurface. The method only requires surface reflection data and estimates of direct (non-reflected) arrivals between subsurface sources and the acquisition surface. The method is demonstrated on a stratified synclinal model and is particularly robust against errors in the velocity model used.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Broggini, F., R.Snieder, and K.Wapenaar
    , 2012, Focusing the wavefield inside an unknown 1D medium – Beyond seismic interferometry: Geophysics, 77, no. 5, A25–A28,
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Dragoset, B., Verschuur, E., Moore, I., and Bisley, R.
    , 2010, A perspective on 3D surface-related multiple elimination, Geophysics, 2010, A245–A261.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Fomel, S.
    , 2009, Adaptive multiple subtraction using regularized nonstationary regression: Geophysics, 74, no. 1, V25–V33.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Hung, B., and Wang, M.
    , 2012, Internal demultiple methodology without identifying the multiple generators. 82nd Annual International Meeting, SEG Expanded Abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Jakubowicz, H.
    , 1998, Wave equation prediction and removal of interbed-multiples: 68th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 1527–1530.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. van Manen, D.-J., J. O. A.Robertsson, and A.Curtis
    , 2005, Modeling of wave propagation in nhomogeneous media: Physical Review Letters, 94, 164301–1–164301–4
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Wapenaar, K., and Fokkema, J.
    , 2006, Green’s function representations for seismic interferometry: Geophysics, Vol. 71, SI33–SI46.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Wapenaar, K., F.Broggini, and R.Snieder
    , 2012, Creating a virtual source inside a medium from reflection data: heuristic derivation and stationaryphase analysis: Geophysical Journal International, 190, 1020–1024.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Weglein, A., F. A.Gasparotto, P. M.Carvalho, and R. H.Stolt
    , 1997, An inverse-scattering series method for attenuating multiples in seismic reflection data: Geophysics, 62, 1975–1989.
    [Google Scholar]

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