1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 67, Issue 5
  5. Article
Volume 67, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Imaging in geological challenging environments has led to new developments, including the idea of generating reflection responses by means of interferometric redatuming at a given target datum in the subsurface, when the target datum lies beneath a complex overburden. One way to perform this redatuming is via conventional model‐based wave‐equation techniques. But those techniques can be computationally expensive for large‐scale seismic problems since the number of wave‐equation solves is equal to two times the number of sources involved during seismic data acquisition. Also conventional shot‐profile techniques require lots of memory to save full subsurface extended image volumes. Therefore, we can only form subsurface image volumes in either horizontal or vertical directions. To exploit the information hidden in full subsurface extended image volumes, we now present a randomized singular value decomposition‐based approach built upon the matrix probing scheme, which takes advantage of the algebraic structure of the extended imaging system. This low‐rank representation enables us to overcome both the computational cost associated with the number of wave‐equation solutions and memory usage due to explicit storage of full subsurface extended image volumes employed by conventional migration methods. Experimental results on complex geological models demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed methodology and allow practical reflection‐based extended imaging for large‐scale five‐dimensional seismic data.

© 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12779
2019-04-02
2024-04-20

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12779
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BakulinA. and CalvertR.2004. Virtual source: new method for imaging and 4D below complex overburden. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 2477–2480.
  2. BakulinA. and CalvertR.2008. Virtual source method: Overview of history and development. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 2726–2730.
  3. BerkhoutA. J.1992. A unified approach to acoustical reflection imaging. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America92, 2446.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BrogginiF., SniederR. and WapenaarK.2012. Focusing the wavefield inside an unknown 1D medium: beyond seismic interferometry. Geophysics77, A25–A28.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. ChandrasekaranS., DewildeP., GuM., LyonsW. and PalsT.2006. A fast solver for HSS representations via sparse matrices. SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications29, 67–81.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. CurtisA. and HallidayD.2010. Source‐receiver wave field interferometry. Physical Review E81, 046601.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. DemanetL., LétourneauP.‐D., BoumalN., CalandraH., ChiuJ. and SnelsonS.2012. Matrix probing: a randomized preconditioner for the wave‐equation hessian. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis32, 155–168.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. HaberE., ChungM. and HerrmannF.2012. An effective method for parameter estimation with PDE constraints with multiple right‐hand sides. SIAM Journal on Optimization22, 739–757.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. HalkoN., MartinssonP.‐G. and TroppJ. A.2011. Finding structure with randomness: probabilistic algorithms for constructing approximate matrix decompositions. SIAM Review53, 217–288.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. HerrmannF. J. and WangD.2008. Seismic wavefield inversion with curvelet‐domain sparsity promotion. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 2497–2501.
  11. HolmesM., GrayA. and IsbellC.2007. Fast SVD for large‐scale matrices. Workshop on Efficient Machine Learning at NIPS, 249–252.
  12. HouJ. and SymesW. W.2015. An approximate inverse to the extended Born modeling operator. Geophysics80, R331–R349.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. JumahB. and HerrmannF. J.2014. Dimensionality‐reduced estimation of primaries by sparse inversion. Geophysical Prospecting62, 972–993.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. LarsenR. M.1998. Lanczos bidiagonalization with partial reorthogonalization. DAIMI Report Series No.537.
  15. LinL., LuJ. and YingL.2011. Fast construction of hierarchical matrix representation from matrix–vector multiplication. Journal of Computational Physics230, 4071–4087.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. LiuX., WenZ. and ZhangY.2013. Limited memory block Krylov subspace optimization for computing dominant singular value decompositions. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing35, A1641–A1668.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. MartinssonP.‐G.2019. Randomized methods for matrix computations.
  18. MehtaK., BakulinA., SheimanJ., CalvertR. and SniederR.2007. Improving the virtual source method by wavefield separation. Geophysics72, V79–V86.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. MuscoC. and MuscoC.2015. Randomized block Krylov methods for stronger and faster approximate singular value decomposition. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 1396–1404.
  20. RavasiM., VasconcelosI., KritskiA., CurtisA., da CostaFilho C. A. and MelesG. A.2016. Target‐oriented Marchenko imaging of a North Sea field. Geophysical Journal International205, 99–104.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. SchusterG. T.2009. Seismic Interferometry. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. SchusterG. T. and ZhouM.2006. A theoretical overview of model‐based and correlation‐based redatuming methods. Geophysics71, SI103–SI110.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. SniederR.2004. Extracting the Green's function from the correlation of coda waves: a derivation based on stationary phase. Physical Review E69, 046610.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. SniederR., SheimanJ. and CalvertR.2006. Equivalence of the virtual‐source method and wave‐field deconvolution in seismic interferometry. Physical Review E73, 066620.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. StolkC. C. and M. V. DeHoop. 2005. Modeling of seismic data in the downward continuation approach. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics65, 1388–1406.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. StolkC. C., De HoopM. V. and SymesW. W.2009. Kinematics of shot‐geophone migration. Geophysics74, WCA18–WCA34.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. SymesW. W.2008. Approximate linearized inversion by optimal scaling of prestack depth migration. Geophysics73, R23–R35.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. tenKroode F.2012. A wave‐equation‐based Kirchhoff operator. Inverse Problems28, 115013.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. The SMAART JV . 2001. Sigsbee2A velocity model.
  30. ThomsonC. J.2012. The form of the reflection operator and extended image gathers for a dipping plane reflector in two space dimensions. Geophysical Prospecting60, 64–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. van der NeutJ. and HerrmannF. J.2013. Interferometric redatuming by sparse inversion. Geophysical Journal International192, 666–670.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. van der Neut, J., MehtaK., ThorbeckeJ. and WapenaarK.2010, Controlled‐source elastic interferometric imaging by multidimensional deconvolution with downhole receivers below a complex overburden. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 3979–3985.
  33. van Leeuwen, T., KumarR. and HerrmannF. J.2017. Enabling affordable omnidirectional subsurface extended image volumes via probing. Geophysical Prospecting65, 385–406.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. VasconcelosI. and RickettJ.2013. Broadband extended images by joint inversion of multiple blended wavefields. Geophysics78, WA147–WA158.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. VasconcelosI., SavaP. and DoumaH.2010. Nonlinear extended images via image‐domain interferometry. Geophysics75, SA105–SA115.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. VersteegR.1994. The Marmousi experience: Velocity model determination on a synthetic complex data set. The Leading Edge13, 927–936.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. WapenaarK., BrogginiF. and SniederR.2012. Creating a virtual source inside a medium from reflection data: heuristic derivation and stationary‐phase analysis. Geophysical Journal International190, 1020–1024.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. WapenaarK. and FokkemaJ.2006. Green's function representations for seismic interferometry. Geophysics71, SI33–SI46.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. WapenaarK., SlobE. and SniederR.2008. Seismic and electromagnetic controlled‐source interferometry in dissipative media. Geophysical Prospecting56, 419–434.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. WapenaarK. and van der NeutJ.2010. A representation for Green's function retrieval by multidimensional deconvolution. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America128, EL366–yEL371.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12779
Loading
Target‐oriented imaging using extended image volumes: a low‐rank factorization approach
Geophysical Prospecting 67, 1312 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12779
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12779
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12779
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Extended‐image volume; Interferometry; Low‐rank factorization; Point spread function; Randomized SVD; Redatum; Target‐imaging

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

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