1887

Abstract

Summary

Time and spatial shift estimation in time-lapse seismic data is usually achieved using cross-correlation. While this method works generally well and it is robust in dealing with real data, it has some drawbacks. We propose here two alternative methods based on mutual information and on the signal envelope, with the aim of getting an improved estimation of the temporal and spatial 4D shifts, even in the case of signal phase variations between base and monitor image. We quantify the performances of the proposed methods using synthetic examples, and we also show results of application to a real 4D dataset. From the analysed results, we conclude that the mutual information method gives better results than cross-correlation, but the larger improvements are obtained when computing the envelope of the signal, as it allows well estimating the time shifts in presence of 4D phase variations between base and monitor. Moreover, the results on field data obtained with the envelope-based mutual information method are more closely related to the expected dynamic changes within the reservoir.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201701384
2017-06-12
2020-07-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Hale, D.
    [2009] A method for estimating apparent displacement vectors from time-lapse seismic images. Geophysics, 74(5), V99–V107.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Pazetti, B., Donno, D., Davolio, A., Grana, D. and Schiozer, D. J.
    [2016] The impact of time-shift estimation and correction on two 4D attributes: amplitude difference and velocity change. 75th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Extended Abstracts, Th-LHR2–07.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Pluim, J. P. W., Maintz, J. B. A. and Viergever, M. A.
    [2003] Mutual-information-based registration of medical images: a survey. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 22(8), 986–1004.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Rickett, J. and Lumley, D. E.
    [2001] Cross-equalization data processing for time-lapse seismic reservoir monitoring: A case study from the Gulf of Mexico. Geophysics, 66, 1015–1025.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Stammeijer, J. G. F. and Hatchell, P. J.
    [2014] Standards in 4D feasibility and interpretation. The Leading Edge, 33(2), 134–140.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Wells, W. M.III, Viola, P., Atsumi, H., Nakajima, S. and Kikinis, R.
    [1996] Multi-modal volume registration by maximization of mutual information. Medical Image Analysis, 1(1), 35–51.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201701384
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201701384
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