1887

Abstract

Summary

Our proposal provides post-migration techniques for computing angle-domain common-image gathers (CIGs) from seismic images, extended by the subsurface offset, in relation with wave-equation migration methods. In addition to the commonly used decomposition of the scattering-angles, we associate the wave-equation migration with dip-domain image gathers as well. Our methodology suggests a system of Radon transform operators by introducing local transform relations between the subsurface offset image and the angle-domain components. The same subsurface offset extended image is employed to decompose scattering and dip angle CIGs individually, or to decompose a multi-angle CIG by showing simultaneously both angles on the gather’s axis.

It is our belief that dip-angle information, decomposed by wave-equation migration, would have a great impact in making the scattering-angle reflection coefficient more reliable and noise-free, in addition to the expected acceleration of wave-equation inversion methods.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201601530
2016-05-31
2020-04-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Biondi, B. and Symes, W.W
    [2004] Angle-domain common-image gathers for migration velocity analysis by wavefield-continuation imaging. Geophysics, 69(5), 1283–1298.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Dafni, R. and Reshef, M.
    [2012] Interval velocity analysis using multiparameter common image gathers, Geophysics, 77(4), U63–U72.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Jin, H., McMechan, G. A. and Guan, H.
    [2014] Comparison of methods for extracting ADCIGs from RTM. Geophysics, 79(3), S89–S103.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Koren, Z. and Ravve, I.
    [2011] Full-azimuth subsurface angle domain wavefield decomposition and imaging Part I: Directional and reflection image gathers. Geophysics, 76(1), S1–S13.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Landa, E., Fomel, S. and Reshef, M.
    [2008] Separation, imaging and velocity analysis of seismic diffractions using migrated dip-angle gathers. 78th Annual Meeting, SEG, 2176–2180.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Ravve, I. and Koren, Z.
    [2011] Full-azimuth subsurface angle domain wavefield decomposition and imaging Part 2: Local angle domain. Geophysics, 76(2), S51–S64.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Rickett, j. E. and Sava, P. C.
    [2002] Offset and angle-domain common image-point gathers for shot-profile migration. Geophysics, 67(3), 883–889.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Sava, P. C. and Fomel, S.
    [2003] Angle-domain common-image gathers by wavefield continuation methods. Geophysics, 68(3), 1065–1074.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Sava, P. C. and Vasconcelos, I.
    [2011] Extended imaging conditions for wave-equation migration. Geophysical Prospecting, 59(1), 35–55.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Stolk, C.C., de Hoop, M. V. and Symes, W.W.
    [2009] Kinematics of shot-geophone migration. Geophysics, 74(6), WCA19–WCA34.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Symes, W.W.
    [2008] Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 56(6), 765–790.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201601530
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201601530
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