1887
  1. Home
  2. Conferences
  3. Conference Proceedings
  4. 77th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2015
  5. Conference paper

Abstract

Summary

In the denoising process of seismic prospecting, random noise is often assumed to be stationary. However, this is not always appropriate for real seismic data. Here, using the passive noise records collected according to the requirements of the actual seismic prospecting, we use the statistical testing methods to investigate the stationarity of land-seismic-prospecting random noise. The results show that the noise can not be considered as a stationary stochastic process. By analyzing the behaviors of the dataset, we obtain that the non-stationary noise always have more energy in high frequency bands, and the energy distributions of the non-stationary noise are disordered in high frequencies. Thus, the stationarity of the random noise should be improved by attenuating the energy in high frequencies. We use an experiment to prove the correctness of our results. Based on the generating mechanism of the random noise, we also give a reasonable explanation. The findings have implications for future noise reduction and signal detection algorithms.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413418
2015-06-01
2024-04-26

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413418
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Borgnat, P., Flandrin, P., Honeine, P., Richard, C. and Xiao, J.
    , 2010, Testing stationarity with surrogates: a time-frequency approach: IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 58(7), 3459–3470.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Chatifield, C.
    , 2013, The analysis of time series: An instruction (Sixth Edition): Champan&Hall/CRC, Washington, D.C., USA, 35.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Gulunay, N.
    , 2008. Two different algorithms for seismic interference noise attenuation: Leading Edge, 27(2), 176–181.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. McNamara, D.E. and Buland, R.P.
    , 2004. Ambient noise levels in the continental United States: Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 94(4), 1517–1527.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Schreiber, T. and Schmitz, A.
    , 1996, Improved surrogate data for nonlinear tests: Phys. Rev. Lett, 77(4), 635–638.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Thomson, D.J.
    , 1982, Spectrum estimation and harmonic analysis: Proc. IEEE, 70, 1055–1096.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Tomasi, B., Preisig, J., Deane, G. and Zirzi, M.
    2011. A study on the wide-sense stationarity of the underwater acoustic channel for non-coherent communication systems: European Wireless Conference, 1–6.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Yilmaz, O.
    , 2001, Seismic data analysis: processing, inversion, and interpretation of seismic data (Second Edition): Soc. Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, USA, 169.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Zhong, T., Li, Y., Wu, N., Nie, P.F. and Yang, B.J.
    , 2014, Statistical analysis of background noise in seismic prospecting: Geophysical Prospecting (Accept).
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413418
Loading
A Study on the Stationarity of the Random Noise in Seismic Prospecting
Conference Proceedings 2015, 1 (2015); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201413418
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413418
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413418
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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