1887

Abstract

Summary

Seismic data processing relies on multiples attenuation to improve inversion and interpretation. Radon-based algorithms are often used for multiples and primaries discrimination. Deep learning, based on convolutional neural networks (CNNs), has shown encouraging applications for demultiple that could mitigate Radon-based challenges. In this work, we investigate new strategies to train a CNN for multiples removal based on different loss functions. We propose combined primaries and multiples labels in the loss for training a CNN to predict primaries, multiples, or both simultaneously. Moreover, we investigate two distinctive training methods for all the strategies: UNet based on minimum absolute error (L1) training, and adversarial training (GAN-UNet). We test the trained models with the different strategies and methods on 400 synthetic data. We found that training to predict multiples, including the primaries labels as a constraint, is the most effective strategy for demultiple. Finally, we test the methods on a field dataset. UNet models trained with L1 report competitive results with Radon demultiple on field data, and better performance than GAN-UNet on synthetic and field data. As a result, it can potentially replace Radon-based demultiple in existing workflows.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.2023101170
2023-06-05
2024-04-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Breuer, A., Ettrich, N., and Habelitz, P. [2020]. Deep learning in seismic processing: Trim statics and demultiple. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bugge, A., Evensen, A., Lie, J., and Nilsen, E. [2021]. Demonstrating multiple attenuation with model-driven processing using neural networks. The Leading Edge, 40(11):831–836.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Durall, R., Ghamin, A., Ettrich, N., and Keuper, J. [2022]. Dissecting U-net for Seismic Application: An In-Depth Study on Deep Learning Multiple Removal. arXiv.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Goodfellow, I. J., Pouget-Abadie, J., Mirza, M., Xu, B., Warde-Farley, D., Ozair, S., Courville, A., and Bengio, Y. [2014]. Generative Adversarial Nets. NIPS.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Isola, P., Zhu, J., Zhou, T. and Efros, A. [2018]. Image-to-image translation with Conditional Adversarial Networks. arXiv.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Kaur, H., Pham, N., and Fomel, S. [2021]. Seismic data interpolation using deep learning with generative adversarial networks. Geophysical Prospecting, 69, 307–326.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., and Brox, T. [2015]. U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation. arXiv.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Trad, D., Ulrych, T., and Sacchi, M. [2003]. Latest views of the sparse Radon transform. Geophysics, 68(1):386–399.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.2023101170
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.2023101170
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