1887

Abstract

Summary

Full Waveform Inversion (FWI) has become a standard tool for imaging subsurface. Although the acoustic formulation of the wave equation in FWI has been commonly used, excluding the elastic effect could have a significant impact on the inversion results. To quantitatively evaluate the contribution of the elastic approach, we compare acoustic and elastic 3-D FWI applied to a 3-D seismic data set from the East Pacific Rise (EPR) 9°50’ N, collected in deep-marine setting. After conducting a number of tests, we suggest a simultaneous, multi-parameter inversion using frequencies below 7 Hz for both acoustic and elastic approach. The resulting residual from the elastic case is 10–15% lower than that for the acoustic case, suggesting that the elastic approach explains the observed data better. Furthermore, the final compressional velocity model of the subsurface using the two approaches differ significantly, not only in velocity magnitude but also suggest different geological interpretation. We argue that the results obtained from the elastic modelling are geologically more plausible and more reliable image of the subsurface at the EPR.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202010650
2021-10-18
2024-04-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arnulf, A.F., Singh, S.C., Harding, A.J., Kent, G.M. & Crawford, W., 2011. Strong seismic heterogeneity in layer 2A near hydrothermal vents at the mid-Atlantic ridge, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L13320, doi:10.1029/2011GL047753.
    https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL047753 [Google Scholar]
  2. Barnes, C.&Charara, M., 2009. The domain of applicability of acoustic full waveform inversion for marine seismic data, Geophysics, 74(6), WCC91–WCC103.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Carbotte, S.M., Ponce-Correa, G. & Solomon, A., 2000. Evaluation of morphological indicators of magma supply and segmentation from a seismic reflection study of the EPR 15°30_−17° N, J. geophys. Res., 105(B2), 2737–2759.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Collier, J.S. & Singh, S.C., 1997. Detailed structure of the top of the melt body beneath the East Pacific rise at 9°40’N from waveform inversion of seismic reflection data, J. geophys. Res., 102(B9), 20 287–20 304.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Fang, J. et al. (2020) The effects of elastic data on acoustic and elastic full waveform inversion, Journal of Applied Geophysics172, 103876.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Dunn, R.A. & Toomey, D.R., 2001. Crack-induced seismic anisotropy in the oceanic crust across the East Pacific Rise (9°30’N), Earth Planet Sci. Lett., 189, 9–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. He, W., Plessix, R. & Singh, S., 2018. Parametrization study of the land multiparameter VTI elastic waveform inversion, Geophys. J. Int., 213(3), 1660–1672
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Kent, G.M., Harding, A.J., Orcutt, J.A., Detrick, R.S., Mutter, J.C. & Buhl, P., 1994. Uniformaccretion of oceanic crust south of the Garrett transform at 14°15’S on the East Pacific Rise, J. geophys. Res., 99(B5), 9097–9116.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Operto, S., Virieux, J., Dessa, J.X. & Pascal, G., 2006. Crustal imaging from multifold ocean bottom seismometers data by frequency-domain full waveform tomography: application to the eastern Nankai trough, J. Geophys. Res.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Plessix, R.-E., Milcik, P., Rynja, H., Stopin, A. & Matson, K., 2013. Multiparameter full-waveform inversion: marine and land examples, Leading Edge, 32(9), 1030–1038.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Pratt, R.G., Song, Z.-M., Williamson, P. & Warner, M., 1996. Two-dimensional velocity models from wide-angle seismic data by wavefield inversion, Geophys. J. Int., 124(2), 323–340.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Pérez Solano, C.A., & Plessix, R.-E., 2019. Velocity-model building with enhanced shallow resolution using elastic waveform inverison – An example from onshore Oman, Geophysics, 84(6), R989—R1000.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Raknes, E.B., Arntsen, B. & Weibull, W., 2015. Three-dimensional elastic full waveform inversion using seismic data from the Sleipner area, Geophys. J. Int., 202, 1877–1894.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Shipp, R.M. & Singh, S.C., 2002. Two-dimensional full wavefield inversion of wide-aperture marine seismic streamer data, Geophys. J. Int., 151(2), 325–344.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Singh, S.C., Kent, G.M., Collier, J.S., Harding, A.J. & Orcutt, J.A., 1998. Melt to mush variations in crustal magma properties along the ridge crest at the southern East Pacific Rise, Nature, 394, 874–878.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Sirgue, L., Barkved, O.I., Dellinger, J., Etgen, J., Albertin, U. & Kommedal, J.H., 2010. Full waveform inversion: the next leap forward in imaging at Valhall, First Break, 28, 65–70.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Tarantola, A., 1984. Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation, Geophysics, 49(8), 1259–1266.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Virieux, J. & Operto, S., 2009. An overview of full-waveform inversion in exploration geophysics, Geophysics, 74(6), WCC127–WCC152.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Yang, P., Brossier, R., Métivier, L. & Virieux, J., 2016. A review on the systematic formulation of 3D multiparameter full waveform inversion in viscoelastic medium, Geophys. J. Int., 207(1), 129–149.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202010650
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202010650
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