1887

Abstract

Summary

The application of blended acquisition along with irregular acquisition geometries contributes to the economic perspective of a seismic survey. The joint migration inversion scheme is capable of directly processing the data acquired in this way, i.e., without deblending or data reconstruction, and of subsequently estimating both reflectively and velocity models. The workflow proposed in this study aims to design the source blending operator as well as detector and source sampling operators. The approach iteratively computes these parameters in such a way that the quality of reflectivity and velocity models, which are directly estimated from blended and irregularly-sampled data, is adequate. The workflow integrates a genetic algorithm and a convolutional neural network to derive optimum parameters. Bio-inspired operators enable the simultaneous update of the blending and sampling operators. To relate the choice of survey parameters to the performance of a joint migration inversion, we utilize a convolutional neural network. The applied network architecture discards suboptimal solutions among newly generated ones. Conversely, it passes optimal ones to the subsequent step, which successfully enhances the efficiency of the proposed approach. The resultant acquisition scenario yields a notable enhancement in both reflectivity and velocity estimates attributed solely to the choice of survey parameters.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901052
2019-06-03
2020-10-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Berkhout, A. J.
    2008. Changing the mindset in seismic data acquisition. The Leading Edge, 27, 924–938.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2012. Blended acquisition with dispersed source arrays. Geophysics, 77, A19–A23.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 2014. Review Paper: An outlook on the future of seismic imaging, Part III: Joint Migration Inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 62, 950–971.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Boonyasiriwat, C. and Schuster, G. T.
    2010. 3D multisource full-waveform inversion using dynamic random phase encoding. 80th SEG annual meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 1044–1049.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Florez, K. A., Mantilla, J. G. and Ramirez, A. B.
    2016. Full Waveform Inversion (FWI) in time for seismic data acquired using a blended geometry. 2016 XXI Symposium on Signal Processing, Images and Artificial Vision (STSIVA), 1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Herrmann, F.J.
    2010. Randomized sampling and sparsity: Getting more information from fewer samples. Geophysics, 75, WB173–WB187.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Krebs, J. R., Anderson, J. E., Hinkley, D., Neelamani, R., Lee, S., Baumstein, and Lacasse, M.-D.
    2009. Fast full-wavefield seismic inversion using encoded sources. Geophysics, 74, WCC177–WCC188.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Nemeth, T., Wu, C. and Schuster, G. T.
    , 1999. Leastsquares migration of incomplete reflection data. Geophysics, 64, 208–221.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901052
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901052
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