Some aspects of interval velocity analysis using 3-D depth‐migrated gathers

Geophysics ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 261-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moshe Reshef

Analysis of depth‐migrated gathers is the basis of most interval velocity estimation techniques. These gathers, known as common image gathers (CIGs), should consist of flat events when the velocity used for the migration is correct (Faye and Jeannot, 1986; Al‐Yahya, 1989). As a result of this assumption, interval velocity analysis has become a procedure of flattening events in CIGs.

Geophysics ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 70 (3) ◽  
pp. U19-U27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul C. Sava ◽  
Biondo Biondi ◽  
John Etgen

We propose a method for estimating interval velocity using the kinematic information in defocused diffractions and reflections. We extract velocity information from defocused migrated events by analyzing their residual focusing in physical space (depth and midpoint) using prestack residual migration. The results of this residual-focusing analysis are fed to a linearized inversion procedure that produces interval velocity updates. Our inversion procedure uses a wavefield-continuation operator linking perturbations of interval velocities to perturbations of migrated images, based on the principles of wave-equation migration velocity analysis introduced in recent years. We measure the accuracy of the migration velocity using a diffraction-focusing criterion instead of the criterion of flatness of migrated common-image gathers that is commonly used in migration velocity analysis. This new criterion enables us to extract velocity information from events that would be challenging to use with conventional velocity analysis methods; thus, our method is a powerful complement to those conventional techniques. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed methodology using two examples. In the first example, we estimate interval velocity above a rugose salt top interface by using only the information contained in defocused diffracted and reflected events present in zero-offset data. By comparing the results of full prestack depth migration before and after the velocity updating, we confirm that our analysis of the diffracted events improves the velocity model. In the second example, we estimate the migration velocity function for a 2D, zero-offset, ground-penetrating radar data set. Depth migration after the velocity estimation improves the continuity of reflectors while focusing the diffracted energy.


Geophysics ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 72 (6) ◽  
pp. U75-U88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jintan Li ◽  
William W. Symes

The differential semblance method of velocity analysis flattens image gathers automatically by updating interval velocity to minimize the mean square difference of neighboring traces. We detail an implementation using hyperbolic normal moveout correction as the imaging method. The algorithm is fully automatic, accommodates arbitrary acquisition geometry, and outputs 1D, 2D, or 3D interval velocity models. This variant of differential semblance velocity analysis is effective within the limits of its imaging methodology: mild lateral heterogeneity and data dominated by primary events. Coherent noise events such as multiple reflections tend to degrade the quality of the velocity model estimated by differential semblance. We show how to combine differential semblance velocity analysis with dip filtering to suppress multiple reflections and thus improve considerably the accuracy of the velocity estimate. We illustrate this possibility using multiple-rich data from a 2D marine survey.


Geophysics ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (12) ◽  
pp. 2132-2142 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. De Vries ◽  
A. J. Berkhout

Seismic resolution is determined by the sparsity of reflection events together with the dispersion of the wavelets representing those events. In this paper, minimum entropy (ME) norms are introduced as a measure of spatial resolving power. It is shown that the lateral dispersion of inverted diffractor responses (inverted spatial wavelets) increases with increasing velocity error. Using this property, minimum entropy velocity analysis (MEVA) is proposed to extract velocity information from diffraction energy. MEVA can be successfully applied to zero‐offset (including poststack) data and common‐offset data with a sufficient amount of diffraction energy. In addition, MEVA can be used as an alternative to existing CMP velocity estimation techniques.


Geophysics ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 1202-1212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hervé Chauris ◽  
Mark S. Noble ◽  
Gilles Lambaré ◽  
Pascal Podvin

We present a new method based on migration velocity analysis (MVA) to estimate 2‐D velocity models from seismic reflection data with no assumption on reflector geometry or the background velocity field. Classical approaches using picking on common image gathers (CIGs) must consider continuous events over the whole panel. This interpretive step may be difficult—particularly for applications on real data sets. We propose to overcome the limiting factor by considering locally coherent events. A locally coherent event can be defined whenever the imaged reflectivity locally shows lateral coherency at some location in the image cube. In the prestack depth‐migrated volume obtained for an a priori velocity model, locally coherent events are picked automatically, without interpretation, and are characterized by their positions and slopes (tangent to the event). Even a single locally coherent event has information on the unknown velocity model, carried by the value of the slope measured in the CIG. The velocity is estimated by minimizing these slopes. We first introduce the cost function and explain its physical meaning. The theoretical developments lead to two equivalent expressions of the cost function: one formulated in the depth‐migrated domain on locally coherent events in CIGs and the other in the time domain. We thus establish direct links between different methods devoted to velocity estimation: migration velocity analysis using locally coherent events and slope tomography. We finally explain how to compute the gradient of the cost function using paraxial ray tracing to update the velocity model. Our method provides smooth, inverted velocity models consistent with Kirchhoff‐type migration schemes and requires neither the introduction of interfaces nor the interpretation of continuous events. As for most automatic velocity analysis methods, careful preprocessing must be applied to remove coherent noise such as multiples.


Geophysics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 85 (1) ◽  
pp. U21-U29
Author(s):  
Gabriel Fabien-Ouellet ◽  
Rahul Sarkar

Applying deep learning to 3D velocity model building remains a challenge due to the sheer volume of data required to train large-scale artificial neural networks. Moreover, little is known about what types of network architectures are appropriate for such a complex task. To ease the development of a deep-learning approach for seismic velocity estimation, we have evaluated a simplified surrogate problem — the estimation of the root-mean-square (rms) and interval velocity in time from common-midpoint gathers — for 1D layered velocity models. We have developed a deep neural network, whose design was inspired by the information flow found in semblance analysis. The network replaces semblance estimation by a representation built with a deep convolutional neural network, and then it performs velocity estimation automatically with recurrent neural networks. The network is trained with synthetic data to identify primary reflection events, rms velocity, and interval velocity. For a synthetic test set containing 1D layered models, we find that rms and interval velocity are accurately estimated, with an error of less than [Formula: see text] for the rms velocity. We apply the neural network to a real 2D marine survey and obtain accurate rms velocity predictions leading to a coherent stacked section, in addition to an estimation of the interval velocity that reproduces the main structures in the stacked section. Our results provide strong evidence that neural networks can estimate velocity from seismic data and that good performance can be achieved on real data even if the training is based on synthetics. The findings for the 1D problem suggest that deep convolutional encoders and recurrent neural networks are promising components of more complex networks that can perform 2D and 3D velocity model building.


Geophysics ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 57 (8) ◽  
pp. 1034-1047 ◽  
Author(s):  
Biondo Biondi

Imaging seismic data requires detailed knowledge of the propagation velocity of compressional waves in the subsurface. In conventional seismic processing, the interval velocity model is usually derived from stacking velocities. Stacking velocities are determined by measuring the coherency of the reflections along hyperbolic moveout trajectories in offset. This conventional method becomes inaccurate in geologically complex areas because the conversion of stacking velocities to interval velocities assumes a horizontally stratified medium and mild lateral variations in velocity. The tomographic velocity estimation proposed in this paper can be applied when there are dipping reflectors and strong lateral variations. The method is based on the measurements of moveouts by beam stacks. A beam stack measures local coherency of reflections along hyperbolic trajectories. Because it is a local operator, the beam stack can provide information on nonhyperbolic moveouts in the data. This information is more reliable than traveltimes of reflections picked directly from the data because many seismic traces are used for computing beam stacks. To estimate interval velocity, I iteratively search for the velocity model that best predicts the events in beam‐stacked data. My estimation method does not require a preliminary picking of the data because it directly maximizes the beam‐stack’s energy at the traveltimes and surface locations predicted by ray tracing. The advantage of this formulation is that detection of the events in the beam‐stacked data can be guided by the imposition of smoothness constraints on the velocity model. The optimization problem of maximizing beam‐stack energy is solved by a gradient algorithm. To compute the derivatives of the objective function with respect to the velocity model, I derive a linear operator that relates perturbations in velocity to the observed changes in the beam‐stack kinematics. The method has been successfully applied to a marine survey for estimating a low‐velocity anomaly. The estimated velocity function correctly predicts the nonhyperbolic moveouts in the data caused by the velocity anomaly.


Geophysics ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre D. Thore ◽  
Eric de Bazelaire ◽  
Marisha P. Rays

We compare the three‐term equation to the normal moveout (NMO) equation for several synthetic data sets to analyze whether or not it is worth making the additional computational effort in the stacking process within various exploration contexts. In our evaluation we have selected two criteria: 1)The quality of the stacked image. 2) The reliability of the stacking parameters and their usefulness for further computation such as interval velocity estimation. We have simulated the stacking process very precisely, despite using only the traveltimes and not the full waveform data. The procedure searches for maximum coherency along the traveltime curve rather than a least‐square regression to it. This technique, which we call the Gaussian‐weighted least square, avoids most of the shortcomings of the least‐square method. The following are our conclusions: 1) The three term equation gives a better stack than the regular NMO. The increase in stacking energy can be more than 30 percent. 2)The calculation of interval velocities using a DIX formula rewritten for the three‐parameter equation is much more stable and accurate than the standard DIX formula. 3) The search for the three parameters is feasible in an efficient way since the shifted hyperbola requires only static corrections rather than dy namic ones. 4) Noise alters the parameters of the maximum energy stack in a way that depends on the noise type. The estimates obtained remain accurate enough for interval velocity estimation (where only two parameters are needed), but the use of the three parameters in direct inversion may be hazardous because of noise corruption. These conclusions should, however, be verified on real data examples.


1985 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary S. Gassaway ◽  
Richard A. Brown

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document