Velocity model building: A comparison between prestack stereotomography and NIP‐wave tomography

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Dummong ◽  
Kristina Meier ◽  
Christian Hubscher ◽  
Dirk Gajewski
Keyword(s):  
Model Building ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Velocity Model Building ◽  
Wave Tomography

Seismic velocity model building by NIP-wave tomography — a case study in Iran

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hashem shahsavani ◽  
Juergen Mann ◽  
Mehrdad Soleimani ◽  
Reza Sokooti ◽  
Mostafa Vahid Hashemi
Keyword(s):  
Model Building ◽  
Seismic Velocity ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Velocity Model Building ◽  
Wave Tomography

Comparison of prestack stereotomography and NIP wave tomography for velocity model building: Instances from the Messinian evaporites

Geophysics ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. VE291-VE302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Dümmong ◽  
Kristina Meier ◽  
Dirk Gajewski ◽  
Christian Hübscher
Keyword(s):  
Velocity Distribution ◽  
Input Data ◽  
Model Building ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Depth Imaging ◽  
Velocity Models ◽  
Velocity Model Building ◽  
Wave Tomography ◽  
Messinian Evaporites ◽  
The Impact

Velocity-model determination during seismic data processing is crucial for any kind of depth imaging. We compared two approaches of grid tomography: prestack stereotomography and normal-incidence-point (NIP) wave tomography. Whereas NIP wave tomography is based on wavefield attributes obtained during the common reflection surface stack and thus on the underlying hyperbolic second-order traveltime approximation, prestack stereotomography describes traveltimes by local slopes (i.e., linearly) in the prestack data domain. To analyze the impact of the different traveltime approximations and the different input-data domains on velocity model building, we applied two implementations of these techniques to two profiles of a field marine data set from the Levante Basin, eastern Mediterranean. Because ofthe presence of a thick, tabular mobile unit of the Messinian evaporites, strong vertical and lateral velocity contrasts had been expected. The velocity models revealed the reconstruction of high-velocity contrasts by grid tomographic methods is limited because of the smooth description of the velocity distribution. The lateral resolution of velocities obtained from prestack stereotomography appears to be better than those from NIP wave tomography, which is related to the difference in the approximation of traveltimes, the determination of input data, and the description of the velocity distribution. Other differences are caused mainly by different implementations of the inversion schemes. Nevertheless, both algorithms provide suitable models for high-quality depth imaging, whereas most of the reflections are fairly flat in CIGs.

Velocity model building using transfer learning

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jérome Simon ◽  
Gabriel Fabien-Ouellet ◽  
Erwan Gloaguen ◽  
Ishan Khurjekar ◽  
Mauricio Araya-Polo
Keyword(s):  
Transfer Learning ◽  
Model Building ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Velocity Model Building

Practical approaches for subsalt velocity model building

Geophysics ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. VE183-VE194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junru Jiao ◽  
David R. Lowrey ◽  
John F. Willis ◽  
Ruben D. Martínez
Keyword(s):  
Software Package ◽  
Model Building ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Inherent Difficulty ◽  
Velocity Models ◽  
First Approximation ◽  
Velocity Model Building ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Efficient Performance

Imaging sediments below salt bodies is challenging because of the inherent difficulty of estimating accurate velocity models. These models can be estimated in a variety of ways with varying degrees of expense and effectiveness. Two methods are commercially viable trade-offs. In the first method, residual-moveout analysis is performed in a layer-stripping mode. The models produced with this method can be used as a first approximation of the subsalt velocity field. A wave-equation migration scanning technique is more suitable for fine-tuning the velocity model below the salt. Both methods can be run as part of a sophisticated interactive velocity interpretation software package that makes velocity interpretation efficient. Performance of these methods has been tested on synthetic and field data examples.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document