1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 67, Issue 8
  5. Article
Volume 67, Issue 8
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The subsurface media are not perfectly elastic, thus anelastic absorption, attenuation and dispersion (aka filtering) effects occur during wave propagation, diminishing seismic resolution. Compensating for anelastic effects is imperative for resolution enhancement. values are required for most of conventional ‐compensation methods, and the source wavelet is additionally required for some of them. Based on the previous work of non‐stationary sparse reflectivity inversion, we evaluate a series of methods for ‐compensation with/without knowing and with/without knowing wavelet. We demonstrate that if ‐compensation takes the wavelet into account, it generates better results for the severely attenuated components, benefiting from the sparsity promotion. We then evaluate a two‐phase ‐compensation method in the frequency domain to eliminate requirement. In phase 1, the observed seismogram is disintegrated into the least number of ‐filtered wavelets chosen from a dictionary by optimizing a basis pursuit denoising problem, where the dictionary is composed of the known wavelet with different propagation times, each filtered with a range of possible values. The elements of the dictionary are weighted by the infinity norm of the corresponding column and further preconditioned to provide wavelets of different values and different propagation times equal probability to entry into the solution space. In phase 2, we derive analytic solutions for estimates of reflectivity and and solve an over‐determined equation to obtain the final reflectivity series and values, where both the amplitude and phase information are utilized to estimate the values. The evaluated inversion‐based estimation method handles the wave‐interference effects better than conventional spectral‐ratio‐based methods. For ‐compensation, we investigate why sparsity promoting does matter. Numerical and field data experiments indicate the feasibility of the evaluated method of ‐compensation without knowing but with wavelet given.

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

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12838
2019-09-10
2024-04-23

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12838
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AghamiryH.S. and GholamiA.2018. Interval‐Q estimation and compensation: An adaptive dictionary‐learning approach. Geophysics83, V233–V242.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. AkiK. and RichardsP.G.1980. Quantitative Seismology: Theory and Methods. W.H.Freeman.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BanoM.1996. Q‐phase compensation of seismic records in the frequency domain. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America86, 31–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BickelS.H. and NatarajanR.R.1985. Plane‐wave Q deconvolution. Geophysics50, 1426–1439.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. BliasE.2012. Accurate interval Q‐factor estimation from VSP data. Geophysics77, WA149–WA156.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. BragaI.L.S. and MoraesF.S.2013. High‐resolution gathers by inverse Q filtering in the wavelet domain. Geophysics78, V53–V61.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. ChaiX., TangG., WangF., GuH. and WangX.2018. Q‐compensated acoustic impedance inversion of attenuated seismic data: numerical and field‐data experiments. Geophysics83, R553–R567.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. ChaiX., WangS. and TangG.2017a. Sparse reflectivity inversion for nonstationary seismic data with surface‐related multiples: numerical and field‐data experiments. Geophysics82, R199–R217.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. ChaiX., WangS., TangG. and MengX.2017b. Stable and efficient Q‐compensated least‐squares migration with compressive sensing, sparsity‐promoting, and preconditioning. Journal of Applied Geophysics145, 84–99.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. ChaiX., WangS., WeiJ., LiJ. and YinH.2016. Reflectivity inversion for attenuated seismic data: physical modeling and field data experiments. Geophysics81, T11–T24.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. ChaiX., WangS., YuanS., ZhaoJ., SunL. and WeiX.2014. Sparse reflectivity inversion for nonstationary seismic data. Geophysics79, V93–V105.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. ChenH., ZhouH., LiQ. and WangY.2016. Two efficient modeling schemes for fractional Laplacian viscoacoustic wave equation. Geophysics81, T233–T249.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. ChenS.S., DonohoD.L. and SaundersM.A.2001. Atomic decomposition by basis pursuit. SIAM Review43, 129–159.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. ChenY. and FomelS.2018. EMD‐seislet transform. Geophysics83, A27–A32.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. FomelS. and LiuY.2010. Seislet transform and seislet frame. Geophysics75, V25–V38.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. FuttermanW.I.1962. Dispersive body waves. Journal of Geophysical Research67, 5279–5291.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. GholamiA.2015. Semi‐blind nonstationary deconvolution: joint reflectivity and Q estimation. Journal of Applied Geophysics117, 32–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. HerrmannF.J., BrownC.R., ErlanggaY.A. and MoghaddamP.P.2009. Curvelet‐based migration preconditioning and scaling. Geophysics74, A41–A46.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. KerS. and GonidecY.L.2018. Fractional integration of seismic wavelets in anelastic media to recover multiscale properties of impedance discontinuities. Geophysics83, V61–V71.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. KjartanssonE.1979. Constant‐Q wave propagation and attenuation. Journal of Geophysical Research84, 4737–4748.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. KnopoffL.1964. Q. Reviews of Geophysics2, 625–660.
  22. KolskyH.1956. The propagation of stress pulses in viscoelastic solids. Philosophical Magazine1, 693–710.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. LiC. and LiuX.2015. A new method for interval Q‐factor inversion from seismic reflection data. Geophysics80, R361–R373.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. LiG., LiuY., ZhengH. and HuangW.2015. Absorption decomposition and compensation via a two‐step scheme. Geophysics80, V145–V155.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. LiJ., WangS., YangD., DongC., TaoY. and ZhouY.2016. An improved Q estimation approach: the weighted centroid frequency shift method. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering13, 399.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. LiuH., AndersonD.L. and KanamoriH.1976. Velocity dispersion due to anelasticity; implications for seismology and mantle composition. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society47, 41–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. LupinacciW.M., de FrancoA.P., OliveiraS.A.M. and de MoraesF.S.2017. A combined time‐frequency filtering strategy for Q‐factor compensation of poststack seismic data. Geophysics82, V1–V6.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. MargraveG.F., LamoureuxM.P. and HenleyD.C.2011. Gabor deconvolution: estimating reflectivity by nonstationary deconvolution of seismic data. Geophysics76, W15–W30.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. MorozovI. and AhmadiA.B.2015. Taxonomy of Q. Geophysics80, T41–T49.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. MorozovI., HaibaM. and DengW.2018. Inverse attenuation filtering. Geophysics83, V135–V147.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. MorozovI.B.2008. Geometrical attenuation, frequency dependence of Q, and the absorption band problem. Geophysical Journal International175, 239–252.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. NunesB.I.C., MedeirosW.E., NascimentoA.F. and MoreiraJ.A.M.2011. Estimating Q‐factor from surface seismic data: a comparison of current approaches. Journal of Applied Geophysics75, 161–170.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. OliveiraS.A.M. and LupinacciW.M.2013. ℓ1 norm inversion method for deconvolution in attenuating media. Geophysical Prospecting61, 771–777.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. PaigeC.C. and SaundersM.A.1982. LSQR: an algorithm for sparse linear equations and sparse least squares. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software8, 43–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. PinsonL.J.W., HenstockT.J., DixJ.K. and BullJ.M.2008. Estimating Q‐factor and mean grain size of sediments from high‐resolution marine seismic data. Geophysics73, G19–G28.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. QuanY. and HarrisJ.M.1997. Seismic attenuation tomography using the frequency shift method. Geophysics62, 895–905.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. SunL.F., MilkereitB. and SchmittD.R.2009. Measuring velocity dispersion and attenuation in the exploration seismic frequency band. Geophysics74, WA113–WA122.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. SuzukiH. and MatsushimaJ.2013. Quantifying uncertainties in attenuation estimation at methane‐hydrate‐bearing zones using sonic waveform logs. Geophysics78, D339–D353.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. TonnR.1991. The determination of the seismic quality factor Q from VSP data: a comparison of different computational methods. Geophysical Prospecting39, 1–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. ToverudT. and UrsinB.2005. Comparison of seismic attenuation models using zero‐offset vertical seismic profiling (VSP) data. Geophysics70, F17–F25.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. van den BergE. and FriedlanderM.P.2008. Probing the Pareto frontier for basis pursuit solutions. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing31, 890–912.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. van der BaanM.2012. Bandwidth enhancement: inverse Q filtering or time‐varying Wiener deconvolution?Geophysics77, V133–V142.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. WangC., PeiJ. and WangJ.2013a. Near‐surface Q model building and inverse Q filtering: a case study from Daqing oilfield, China: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 1821–1825.
  44. WangL., GaoJ., ZhaoW. and JiangX.2013b. Enhancing resolution of nonstationary seismic data by molecular‐Gabor transform. Geophysics78, V31–V41.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. WangS. and ChenX.2014. Absorption‐compensation method by ℓ1‐norm regularization. Geophysics79, V107–V114.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. WangS., YangD., LiJ. and SongH.2015. Q factor estimation based on the method of logarithmic spectral area difference. Geophysics80, V157–V171.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. WangY.2006. Inverse Q‐filter for seismic resolution enhancement. Geophysics71, V51–V60.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. WangY., MaX., ZhouH. and ChenY.2018a. l1−2 minimization for exact and stable seismic attenuation compensation. Geophysical Journal International213, 1629–1646.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. WangY., ZhouH., ChenH. and ChenY.2018b. Adaptive stabilization for Q‐compensated reverse time migration. Geophysics83, S15–S32.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. ZhangC. and UlrychT.J.2007. Seismic absorption compensation: a least squares inverse scheme. Geophysics72, R109–R114.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12838
Loading
Some remarks on Q‐compensated sparse deconvolution without knowing the quality factor Q
Geophysical Prospecting 67, 2003 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12838
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12838
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12838
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Attenuation; Inverse problem; Inversion; Parameter estimation; Seismics

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