1887

Abstract

Summary

Time migration is an attractive tool to produce subsurface images because it is very fast, less sensitive to the model errors than depth migration and, usually, massively parallelized technique. However, the time-migration operator is derived by considering many assumptions, among others a straight ray propagation, regularly sampled seismic data and infinite migration aperture which frequently results in deteriorated images. Least-squares techniques can also be applied within the time-migration framework to tackle the imaging problems. As migration/demigration strongly depends on the velocity model, we first apply an iterative time-migration model building based on kinematic wavefield attributes and a thresholding approach followed by interpolation and smoothing. In this paper, we investigate three least-squares time-migration methods: the conventional approach using conjugate gradient (L-BFGS) optimization, a single-iteration approach using Hessian filter and CRS data conditioning, an iterative approach using preconditioning by diffraction correlation matrix. All least-squares methods lead to an enhancement of the image resolution and mitigating migration artifacts.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201803062
2018-11-27
2024-04-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aoki, N., and Schuster, G.
    [2009] Fast least-squares migration with a deblurring filter. Geophysics, 74 (6), WCA83–93.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Duquet, B., Marfurt, K. J. and Dellinger, J. A.
    [2000] Kirchhoff modeling, inversion for reflectivity, and subsurface illumination. Geophysics, 65 (4), 1195–1209.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Fletcher, R. P., Nichols, D., Bloor, R. and Coates, R. T.
    [2016] Least-squares migration - Data domain versus image domain using point spread functions. The Leading Edge, 35 (2), 157–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Guitton, A.
    [2004] Amplitude and kinematic corrections of migrated images for nonunitary imaging operators. Geophysics, 69 (4), 1017–1024.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Jäger, R., Mann, J., Höcht, G. and HubralP.
    [2001] Common-reflection-surface stack: Image and attributes. Geophysics, 66 (1), 97–109.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Lambaré, G., Virieux, J., Madariaga, R. and Jin, S.
    [1992] Iterative asymptotic inversion in the acoustic approximation. Geophysics, 57 (9), 1138–1154.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Lecomte, I.
    [2008] Resolution and illumination analyses in PSDM: A ray-based approach. The Leading Edge, 27 (5), 650–663
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Nemeth, T., ChengjunW. and Schuster, G. T.
    [1999] Least-squares migration of incomplete reflection data. Geophysics, 64 (1), 208–221.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Schuster, G.
    [1993] Least-squares cross-well migration. 69th SEG Conference & Exhibition, Expanded Abstracts, 110–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Tarantola, A.
    [1987] Inverse problem theory: Methods for data fitting and model parameter estimationElsevier Science Publishing Company
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Wang, P., Gomes, A., Zhang, Z. and Wang, M.
    [2016] Least-squares RTM: Reality and possibility for subsalt imaging, 86th SEG Conference & Exhibition, Expanded Abstracts, 4204–4208.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201803062
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201803062
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