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
PDF

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Blended acquisition along with efficient spatial sampling is capable of providing high‐quality seismic data in a cost‐effective and productive manner. While deblending and data reconstruction conventionally accompany this way of data acquisition, the recorded data can be processed directly to estimate subsurface properties. We establish a workflow to design survey parameters that account for the source blending as well as the spatial sampling of sources and detectors. The proposed method involves an iterative scheme to derive the survey design leading to optimum reflectivity and velocity estimation via joint migration inversion. In the workflow, we extend the standard implementation of joint migration inversion to cope with the data acquired in a blended fashion along with irregular detector and source geometries. This makes a direct estimation of reflectivity and velocity models feasible without the need of deblending or data reconstruction. During the iterations, the errors in reflectivity and velocity estimates are used to update the survey parameters by integrating a genetic algorithm and a convolutional neural network. Bio‐inspired operators enable the simultaneous update of the blending and sampling operators. To relate the choice of survey parameters to the performance of joint migration inversion, we utilize a convolutional neural network. The applied network architecture discards suboptimal solutions among newly generated ones. Conversely, it carries optimal ones to the subsequent step, which improves the efficiency of the proposed approach. The resultant acquisition scenario yields a notable enhancement in both reflectivity and velocity estimation attributable to the choice of survey parameters.

© 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2019 The Authors. Geophysical Prospecting published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12841
2019-09-10
2024-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12841
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/gpr/67/8/gpr12841.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12841&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Abma, R., Zhang, Q., Arogunmati, A. and Beaudoin, G.2012. An overview of BPs marine independent simultaneous source field trials. 82nd SEG annual meeting, Las Vegas, NV, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 1–5.
  2. AhmadizarF., SoltanianK., AkhlaghianTabF. and TsoulosI.2015. Artificial neural network development by means of a novel combination of grammatical evolution and genetic algorithm. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence39, 1–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. AldawoodA., HoteitI. and AlkhalifahT.2014. The possibilities of compressed‐sensing‐based Kirchhoff prestack migration. Geophysics79, S113–S120.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. AlshuhailA.A. and VerschuurD.J.2019. Robust estimation of vertical symmetry axis models via joint migration inversion: including multiples in anisotropic parameter estimation. Geophysics84, C57–C74.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bak, S.H., Rask, N. and Risi, S.2016. Towards adaptive evolutionary architecture. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Evolutionary and Biologically Inspired Music, Sound, Art and Design, EvoMUSART 2016, Porto, Portugal, pp. 47–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Beasley, C.J., Ronald, E.C. and Jiang, Z.1998. A new look at simultaneous sources. 68th SEG annual meeting, New Orleans, LA, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 133–135.
  7. Ben‐Hadj‐AliH., OpertoS. and VirieuxJ.2011. An efficient frequency‐domain full waveform inversion method using simultaneous encoded sources. Geophysics76, R109–R124.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Berkhout, A.J.1982. Seismic Migration, Imaging of Acoustic Energy by Wave Field Extrapolation, Part A: Theoretical Aspects. Elsevier.
  9. BerkhoutA.J.2008. Changing the mindset in seismic data acquisition. The Leading Edge27, 924–938.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. BerkhoutA.J.2012a. Blended acquisition with dispersed source arrays. Geophysics77, A19–A23.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. BerkhoutA.J.2012b. Combining full wavefield migration and full waveform inversion, a glance into the future of seismic imaging. Geophysics77, S43–S50.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. BerkhoutA.J.2014a. Review paper: an outlook on the future of seismic imaging, part I: forward and reverse modelling. Geophysical Prospecting62, 911–930.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. BerkhoutA.J.2014b. Review paper: an outlook on the future of seismic imaging, part III: joint migration inversion. Geophysical Prospecting62, 950–971.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. BerkhoutA.J., BlacquièreG. and VerschuurD.J.E.2012. Multiscattering illumination in blended acquisition. Geophysics77, P23–P31.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. BerkhoutA.J. and VerschuurD.J.2016. Enriched seismic imaging by using multiple scattering. The Leading Edge35, 128–133.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Bishop, C.2006. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Boonyasiriwat, C. and Schuster, G.T.2010. 3D multisource full‐waveform inversion using dynamic random phase encoding. 80th SEG annual meeting, Denver, CO, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 1044–1049.
  18. BouskaJ.2010. Distance separated simultaneous sweeping, for fast, clean, vibroseis acquisition. Geophysical Prospecting58, 123–153.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. CaporalM., BlacquièreG. and DavydenkoM.2018. Broadband imaging via direct inversion of blended dispersed source array data. Geophysical Prospecting66, 942–953.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. ChenY., YuanJ., ZuS., QuS. and GanS.2015. Seismic imaging of simultaneous‐source data using constrained least‐squares reverse time migration. Journal of Applied Geophysics114, 32–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Davies, E., Tew, P., Glowacki, D.R., Smith, J. and Mitchell, T.2016. Evolving atomic aesthetics and dynamics. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Evolutionary and Biologically Inspired Music, Sound, Art and Design, EvoMUSART 2016, Porto, Portugal, 17–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Davydenko, M. and Verschuur, D.J.2013. Full wavefield migration, using internal multiples for undershooting. 83rd SEG annual meeting, Houston, TX, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 3741–3745.
  23. DebK., PratapA., AgarwalS. and MeyarivanT.2002. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA‐II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation6, 182–197.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. El‐Marhfoul, B. and Verschuur, D.J.2016. High‐resolution, integrated 3D joint migration inversion of surface and VSP data. 86th SEG annual meeting, Dallas, TX, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 672–676.
  25. Florez, K.A., Mantilla, J.G. and Ramirez, A.B.2016. Full waveform inversion (FWI) in time for seismic data acquired using a blended geometry. 2016 XXI Symposium on Signal Processing, Images and Artificial Vision (STSIVA), Bucaramanga, Colombia, 1–5.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. HahnloserR.H., SarpeshkarR., MahowaldM.A., DouglasR.J. and SeungH.S.2000. Digital selection and analogue amplification coexist in a cortex‐inspired silicon circuit. Nature405, 947–951.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. HennenfentG. and HerrmannF.J.2008. Simply denoise: wavefield reconstruction via jittered undersampling. Geophysics73, V19–V28.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. HerrmannF.J.2010. Randomized sampling and sparsity: getting more information from fewer samples. Geophysics75, WB173–WB187.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. HintonG., DengL., YuD., DahlG., Rahman MohamedA., JaitlyN.et al. 2012. Deep neural networks for acoustic modeling in speech recognition: the shared views of four research groups. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine29, 82–97.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. HuangY. and SchusterG.T.2012. Multisource least‐squares migration of marine streamer and land data with frequency‐division encoding. Geophysical Prospecting60, 663–680.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. IbarakiS., TomitaI. and SugimotoK.2015. Aerodynamic design optimization of centrifugal compressor impeller based on genetic algorithm and artificial neural network. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Technical Review52, 77–82.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. JeongW., PyunS., SonW. and MinD.‐J.2013. A numerical study of simultaneous‐source full waveform inversion with l1‐norm. Geophysical Journal International194, 1727–1737.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Kontakis, A. and Verschuur, D.J.2015. Combined focal and coherency‐based deblending strategy. 85th SEG annual meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 4667–4672.
  34. Kramer, O.2016. Machine learning for evolution strategies. Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Kramer, O.2017. Genetic algorithm essentials. Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. KrebsJ.R., AndersonJ.E., HinkleyD., NeelamaniR., LeeS., BaumsteinA.et al. 2009. Fast full‐wavefield seismic inversion using encoded sources. Geophysics74, WCC177–WCC188.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. KumarA., BlacquièreG., PedersenM.W.P. and GoertzA.2016. Full‐wavefield marine survey design using all multiples. Geophysics81, P1–P12.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. LeCunY., BottouL., BengioY. and HaffnerP.1998. Gradient‐based learning applied to document recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE86, 2278–2324.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. LeungM.K.K., XiongH.Y., LeeL.J. and FreyB.J.2014. Deep learning of the tissue‐regulated splicing code. Bioinformatics30, i121–i129.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Lin, T.T.Y. and Herrmann, F.J.2009. Designing simultaneous acquisitions with compressive sensing. 71st EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Extended Abstracts, S006.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. MahdadA., DoulgerisP. and BlacquièreG.2011. Separation of blended data by iterative estimation and subtraction of blending interference noise. Geophysics76, Q9–Q17.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. MarcelinJ.‐L.2004. A metamodel using neural networks and genetic algorithms for an integrated optimal design of mechanisms. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology24, 708–714.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Masaya, S. and Verschuur, D.J.2017. Seismic modeling refracted and reflected waves including internal multiples by one‐way propagators. 87th SEG annual meeting, Houston, TX, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 4138–4142.
  44. Monteagudo, A. and Santos, J.2015. Evolutionary optimization of cancer treatments in a cancer stem cell context. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 2015, GECCO 2015, Madrid, Spain, July 11–15, pp. 233–240.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Moore, I., Dragoset, B., Ommundsen, T., Wilson, D., Ward, C. and Eke, D.2008. Simultaneous source separation using dithered sources. 78th SEG annual meeting, Las Vegas, NV, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 2806–2810.
  46. Mosher, C.C., Kaplan, S.T. and Janiszewski, F.D.2012. Non‐uniform optimal sampling for seismic survey design. 74th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Copenhagen, Denmark, Extended Abstracts, X034.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Murphy, K.P.2012. Machine Learning: A Probabilistic Perspective. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. NakayamaS., BlacquièreG., IshiyamaT. and IshikawaS.2019. Blended‐acquisition design of irregular geometries towards faster, cheaper, safer and better seismic surveying. Geophysical Prospecting67, 1498–1521.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. NakayamaS., MercadoG., BensonM., BelaidK. and GardenM.2015. Field‐wide implementation of time and distance separated source techniques on a 3D OBC survey offshore Abu Dhabi, UAE. First Break33, 47–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. NemethT., WuC. and SchusterG.T.1999. Least‐squares migration of incomplete reflection data. Geophysics64, 208–221.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Perez‐Liebana, D., Dieskau, J., Hunermund, M., Mostaghim, S. and Lucas, S.M.2015. Open loop search for general video game playing. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, Madrid, Spain, pp. 337–344.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Qu, S., Sun, Y. and Verschuur, D.J.2018. Mitigating amplitude versus ray‐parameter effect in joint migration inversion using a zero‐lag cross‐correlation objective function of redatumed wavefields. 88th SEG annual meeting, Anaheim, CA, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 1133–1137.
  53. Qu, S. and Verschuur, D.J.2017. Simultaneous joint migration inversion for semi‐continuous time‐lapse seismic data. 87th SEG annual meeting, Houston, TX, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 5808–5813.
  54. SakaguchiD., TunM., NumakuraR. and WangB.2018. Global optimization of recirculation flow type casing treatment in centrifugal compressors of turbochargers. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science232, 4461–4471.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. SatoT. and FujitaM.2016. An investigation of design optimization of electric devices supported by machine learning. IEICE Technical Report116, 289–294.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. SchmidhuberJ.2015. Deep learning in neural networks. An overview. Neural Networks61, 85–117.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Scirea, M., Togelius, J., Eklund, P. and Risi, S.2016. Metacompose: a compositional evolutionary music composer. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Evolutionary and Biologically Inspired Music, Sound, Art and Design, EvoMUSART 2016, Porto, Portugal, 202–217.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Southall, B.L., Bowles, A.E., Ellison, W.T., Finneran, J.J., Gentry, R.L., Greene, C.R.J.et al. 2007. Marine mammal noise exposure criteria: initial scientific recommendations. Aquatic Mammals33, no. 4, 411–522.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. SreekanthJ. and DattaB.2011. Comparative evaluation of genetic programming and neural network as potential surrogate models for coastal aquifer management. Water Resources Management25, 3201–3218.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Staal, X.R.2015. Combined imaging and velocity estimation by joint migration inversion. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
  61. Staal, X.R. and Verschuur, D.J.2013. Joint migration inversion, imaging including all multiples with automatic velocity update. 75th EAGE annual meeting, London, UK, Extended Abstracts, 10–13.
  62. Sun, Y., Kim, Y.S., Qu, S., Verschuur, D.J., Almomin, A. and van Borselen, R.2018. Angle‐dependent full wavefield migration based upon full waveform inversion and joint migration inversion. 88th SEG annual meeting, Anaheim, CA, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 4357–4361.
  63. Tang, Y. and Biondi, B.2009. Least‐squares migration/inversion of blended data. 79th SEG annual meeting, Houston, TX, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 2859–2863.
  64. TarantolaA.1984. Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation. Geophysics49, 1259–1266.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Tenne, Y. and Goh, C.‐K.2010. Computational intelligence in expensive optimization problems. Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. VerschuurD.J. and BerkhoutA.J.2015. From removing to using multiples in closed‐loop imaging. The Leading Edge34, 744–759.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. VerschuurD.J., StaalX.R. and BerkhoutA.J.2016. Joint migration inversion: simultaneous determination of velocity fields and depth images using all orders of scattering. The Leading Edge35, 1037–1046.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. VerschuurD.J.E. and BerkhoutA.J.2011. Seismic migration of blended shot records with surface‐related multiple scattering. Geophysics76, A7–A13.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Wang, C., Yingst, D., Brittan, J., Farmer, P. and Leveille, J.2014. Fast multi‐parameter anisotropic full waveform inversion with irregular shot sampling. 84th SEG annual meeting, Denver, CO, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 1147–1151.
  70. Xie, L. and Yuille, A.2017. Genetic CNN. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 1379–1388.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12841
Loading
Acquisition design for direct reflectivity and velocity estimation from blended and irregularly sampled data
Geophysical Prospecting 67, 2127 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12841
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12841
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12841
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Acquisition; Genetic algorithm; Neural network; Optimization; Reflectivity; Velocity

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