Signal Analysis and Imaging Group Department of Physics University of Alberta Regularized Migration/Inversion Henning Kuehl (Shell Canada) Mauricio Sacchi.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
(t,x) domain, pattern-based ground roll removal Morgan P. Brown* and Robert G. Clapp Stanford Exploration Project Stanford University.
Advertisements

Multiple Removal with Local Plane Waves
Differential Semblance Optimization for Common Azimuth Migration
Extended Full Waveform Inversion with Common Offset Image Gathers
Multi-source Least Squares Migration and Waveform Inversion
The recovery of seismic reflectivity in an attenuating medium Gary Margrave, Linping Dong, Peter Gibson, Jeff Grossman, Michael Lamoureux University of.
Velocity Reconstruction from 3D Post-Stack Data in Frequency Domain Enrico Pieroni, Domenico Lahaye, Ernesto Bonomi Imaging & Numerical Geophysics area.
Inversion of Z-Axis Tipper Electromagnetic (Z-TEM)‏ Data The UBC Geophysical Inversion Facility Elliot Holtham and Douglas Oldenburg.
CROSSWELL IMAGING BY 2-D PRESTACK WAVEPATH MIGRATION
Arbitrary Parameter Extraction, Stationary Phase Migration, and Tomographic Velocity Analysis Jing Chen University of Utah.
FAST VELOCITY ANALYSIS BY PRESTACK WAVEPATH MIGRATION H. Sun Geology and Geophysics Department University of Utah.
Xi’an Jiaotong University 1 Quality Factor Inversion from Prestack CMP data using EPIF Matching Jing Zhao, Jinghuai Gao Institute of Wave and Information,
Youli Quan & Jerry M. Harris
3-D PRESTACK WAVEPATH MIGRATION H. Sun Geology and Geophysics Department University of Utah.
Applications of Time-Domain Multiscale Waveform Tomography to Marine and Land Data C. Boonyasiriwat 1, J. Sheng 3, P. Valasek 2, P. Routh 2, B. Macy 2,
Imaging of diffraction objects using post-stack reverse-time migration
MD + AVO Inversion Jianhua Yu, University of Utah Jianxing Hu GXT.
Surface wave tomography: part3: waveform inversion, adjoint tomography
Elastic Inversion Using Partial Stack Seismic Data: Case Histories in China.
Multisource Least-squares Reverse Time Migration Wei Dai.
Raanan Dafni,  Dual BSc in Geophysics and Chemistry (Tel-Aviv University).  PhD in Geophysics (Tel-Aviv University).  Paradigm Geophysics R&D ( ).
V.2 Wavepath Migration Overview Overview Kirchhoff migration smears a reflection along a fat ellipsoid, so that most of the reflection energy is placed.
Automatic Wave Equation Migration Velocity Analysis Peng Shen, William. W. Symes HGRG, Total E&P CAAM, Rice University This work supervised by Dr. Henri.
Processing Lab 9 Objectives: - View a timeslice - Consider binning effects on migration - Post stack Migration Sumit VermaBryce Hutchinson.
Attribute- Assisted Seismic Processing and Interpretation 3D CONSTRAINED LEAST-SQUARES KIRCHHOFF PRESTACK TIME MIGRATION Alejandro.
Impact of MD on AVO Inversion
EXPLORATION GEOPHYSICS. EARTH MODEL NORMAL-INCIDENCE REFLECTION AND TRANSMISSION COEFFICIENTS WHERE:  1 = DENSITY OF LAYER 1 V 1 = VELOCITY OF LAYER.
Multisource Least-squares Migration of Marine Data Xin Wang & Gerard Schuster Nov 7, 2012.
Wave-equation migration velocity analysis Biondo Biondi Stanford Exploration Project Stanford University Paul Sava.
Fast Least Squares Migration with a Deblurring Filter Naoshi Aoki Feb. 5,
A Blind Test of Traveltime and Waveform Inversion Colin A. Zelt 1, R. Gerhard Pratt 2, Andrew Brenders 2, Sara Hanson-Hedgecock 1 and John A. Hole 3 1.
LEAST SQUARES DATUMING AND SURFACE WAVES PREDICTION WITH INTERFEROMETRY Yanwei Xue Department of Geology & Geophysics University of Utah 1.
Super-virtual Interferometric Diffractions as Guide Stars Wei Dai 1, Tong Fei 2, Yi Luo 2 and Gerard T. Schuster 1 1 KAUST 2 Saudi Aramco Feb 9, 2012.
Least squares migration of elastic data Aaron Stanton and Mauricio Sacchi PIMS 2015.
Wave-Equation Waveform Inversion for Crosswell Data M. Zhou and Yue Wang Geology and Geophysics Department University of Utah.
Migration Velocity Analysis of Multi-source Data Xin Wang January 7,
2004 SEPM.P. Brown Least-squares Joint Imaging of Multiples and Primaries Morgan Brown 2004 SEP Meeting 19 May 2004.
Raanan Dafni,  PhD in Geophysics (Tel-Aviv University)  Paradigm R&D ( )  Post-Doc (Rice University) Current Interest: “Wave-equation based.
Fast Least Squares Migration with a Deblurring Filter 30 October 2008 Naoshi Aoki 1.
Fast 3D Least-squares Migration with a Deblurring Filter Wei Dai.
Lee M. Liberty Research Professor Boise State University.
Papia Nandi-Dimitrova Education Rice University, PhD Geophysics 2012-Present University of Wyoming, MS Geophysics2005 University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
HOCIGs and VOCIGs via Two-way Reverse Time Migration
Angle-Domain RTM: a Dip-Angle Construction
I. Tutorial: ISS imaging
Compensating for attenuation by inverse Q filtering
Skeletonized Wave-Equation Surface Wave Dispersion (WD) Inversion
POTSI Gaboring Advances
M-OSRP 2006 Annual Meeting, June 6, 2007
Haiyan Zhang and Arthur B. Weglein
High Resolution AVO NMO
Non-local Means (NLM) Filter for Trim Statics
Source wavelet effects on the ISS internal multiple leading-order attenuation algorithm and its higher-order modification that accommodate issues that.
The FOCI method versus other wavefield extrapolation methods
Overview of Multisource and Multiscale Seismic Inversion
Summary: Lateral Resolution
Gary Margrave and Michael Lamoureux
Overview of Multisource and Multiscale Seismic Inversion
PS, SSP, PSPI, FFD KM SSP PSPI FFD.
Haiyan Zhang and Arthur B. Weglein
Some remarks on the leading order imaging series
High Resolution Velocity Analysis for Resource Plays
Non-local Means (NLM) Filter for Trim Statics
A Direct Numerical Imaging Method for Point and Extended Targets
bc POTSI Gaboring Advances
EXPLORATION GEOPHYSICS
Prestack depth migration in angle-domain using beamlet decomposition:
LSMF for Suppressing Multiples
Wave Equation Dispersion Inversion of Guided P-Waves (WDG)
Presentation transcript:

Signal Analysis and Imaging Group Department of Physics University of Alberta Regularized Migration/Inversion Henning Kuehl (Shell Canada) Mauricio Sacchi (Physics, UofA) Juefu Wang (Physics, UofA) Carrie Youzwishen (Exxon/Mobil) This doc -> http://www.phys.ualberta.ca/~sacchi/pims03.ppt Email: sacchi@phys.ualberta.ca Good afternoon everyone, I’m giving a talk on seismic wavefield reconstruction for AVA imaging .

Outline Motivation and Goals Migration/inversion - Evolution of ideas and concepts Quadratic versus non-quadratic regularization two examples The migration problem RLS migration with quadratic regularzation Examples RLS migration with non-quadratic regularization Summary

Motivation To go beyond the resolution provided by the data (aperture and band-width) by incorporating quadratic and non-quadratic regularization terms into migration/inversion algorithms This is not a new idea… The motivation we regularize seismic data before wave equation, without the regulariztion. AVA imaging may lack of amplidued fidelity due to uneven distrubution of offset in CDP bins. is AVA imaging, no matter ray tracing based Kirchhoff GRT, or wave equation based, they can have problem of lack of amplitude fidelity dues to uneven distribution of offset in CDP bins. And It’s often true for seismic data, especially in 3D. The problem oftenOne of the way to solve this problem is to use interpolation. In this talk, I will show you how interpolation of seismic data can be used to improve that we want to find a way to regularize seismic data before pre-stack 3D wave equation imaging. As we know that in 3D, AVA imaging is often lack of amplitude fidelity due to uneven distribution of offset in CDP bins

Evolution of ideas and concepts Migration with Adjoint Operators [Current technology] RLS Migration (Quadratic Regularization) [Not in production yet] RLS Migration (Non-Quadratic Regularization) [??] The motivation we regularize seismic data before wave equation, without the regulariztion. AVA imaging may lack of amplidued fidelity due to uneven distrubution of offset in CDP bins. is AVA imaging, no matter ray tracing based Kirchhoff GRT, or wave equation based, they can have problem of lack of amplitude fidelity dues to uneven distribution of offset in CDP bins. And It’s often true for seismic data, especially in 3D. The problem oftenOne of the way to solve this problem is to use interpolation. In this talk, I will show you how interpolation of seismic data can be used to improve that we want to find a way to regularize seismic data before pre-stack 3D wave equation imaging. As we know that in 3D, AVA imaging is often lack of amplitude fidelity due to uneven distribution of offset in CDP bins Resolution

Evolution of ideas and concepts Migration with Adjoint Operators 1 RLS Migration (Quadratic Regularization) 2 RLS Migration (Non-Quadratic Regularization) The motivation we regularize seismic data before wave equation, without the regulariztion. AVA imaging may lack of amplidued fidelity due to uneven distrubution of offset in CDP bins. is AVA imaging, no matter ray tracing based Kirchhoff GRT, or wave equation based, they can have problem of lack of amplitude fidelity dues to uneven distribution of offset in CDP bins. And It’s often true for seismic data, especially in 3D. The problem oftenOne of the way to solve this problem is to use interpolation. In this talk, I will show you how interpolation of seismic data can be used to improve that we want to find a way to regularize seismic data before pre-stack 3D wave equation imaging. As we know that in 3D, AVA imaging is often lack of amplitude fidelity due to uneven distribution of offset in CDP bins Resolution

Evolution of ideas and concepts Two examples LS Deconvolution Sparse Spike Deconvolution LS Radon Transforms HR Radon Transforms The motivation we regularize seismic data before wave equation, without the regulariztion. AVA imaging may lack of amplidued fidelity due to uneven distrubution of offset in CDP bins. is AVA imaging, no matter ray tracing based Kirchhoff GRT, or wave equation based, they can have problem of lack of amplitude fidelity dues to uneven distribution of offset in CDP bins. And It’s often true for seismic data, especially in 3D. The problem oftenOne of the way to solve this problem is to use interpolation. In this talk, I will show you how interpolation of seismic data can be used to improve that we want to find a way to regularize seismic data before pre-stack 3D wave equation imaging. As we know that in 3D, AVA imaging is often lack of amplitude fidelity due to uneven distribution of offset in CDP bins Quadratic Regularization Stable and Fast Algorithms Low Resolution Non-quadratic Regularization Requires Sophisticated Optimization Enhanced Resolution

Deconvolution Quadratic versus non-quadratic regularization

Convolution / Cross-correlation / Deconv Deconvolution Here is a toy example of the linear equation, Assume complete data consists of M=5 consecutive samples x1 x2 …, a sampling set N indicates the position of Known sample are at 2 3 5, so the incomplete data y consists of x(2) x(3) x(5). The sampling opertor is a 0/1 matrix. It is obvious that The linear systerm is underdetermined. we have more unknowns than observation. The solutions to such a system is non-unique. In general, we solve this type of problem by restricting the class of solution by providing suitable prior information.

Quadratic and Non-quadratic Regularization Cost Quadratic Here is a toy example of the linear equation, Assume complete data consists of M=5 consecutive samples x1 x2 …, a sampling set N indicates the position of Known sample are at 2 3 5, so the incomplete data y consists of x(2) x(3) x(5). The sampling opertor is a 0/1 matrix. It is obvious that The linear systerm is underdetermined. we have more unknowns than observation. The solutions to such a system is non-unique. In general, we solve this type of problem by restricting the class of solution by providing suitable prior information. Non-quadratic

Adj LS HR

Radon Transform Quadratic versus non-quadratic regularization

LS Radon q h

HR Radon q h

Modeling / Migration / Inversion De-blurring problem Here is a toy example of the linear equation, Assume complete data consists of M=5 consecutive samples x1 x2 …, a sampling set N indicates the position of Known sample are at 2 3 5, so the incomplete data y consists of x(2) x(3) x(5). The sampling opertor is a 0/1 matrix. It is obvious that The linear systerm is underdetermined. we have more unknowns than observation. The solutions to such a system is non-unique. In general, we solve this type of problem by restricting the class of solution by providing suitable prior information.

Back to migration Inducing a sparse solution via non-quadratic regularization appears to be a good idea (at least for the two previous examples) Q. Is the same valid for Migration/Inversion?

Back to migration Inducing a sparse solution via non-quadratic regularization appears to be a good idea (at least for the two previous examples) Q. In the same valid for Migration/Inversion? A. Not so fast… First, we need to define what we are inverting for…

Migration as an inverse problem Forward Adjoint Data “Image” or Angle Dependent Reflectivity

Migration as an inverse problem There is No general agreement about what type of regularization should be used when inverting for m=m(x,z)… Geology is too complicated… For angle dependent images, m(x,z,p), we attempt to impose horizontal smoothness along the “redundant” variable in the CIGs: Kuehl, 2002, PhD Thesis UofA url: cm-gw.phys.ualberta.ca~/sacchi/saig/index.html

Quadratic Regularization Migration Algorithm Features: DSR/AVP Forward/Adjoint Operator (Prucha et. al, 1999) PSPI/Split Step Optimization via PCG 2D/3D (Common Azimuth) MPI/Open MP Kuehl and Sacchi, Geophysics, January 03 [Amplitudes in 2D]

2D - Synthetic data example

Marmousi model (From H. Kuehl Thesis, UofA, 02) AVA target Velocity Density

Migrated AVA CMP position [m] Ray parameter [mu s/m] 7000 7500 8000 200 400 600 800 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 ] ] m m k k [ [ h h t t p 1.5 p 1.5 e e D D 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5

Regularized Migrated AVA p t h [ k m ] 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 7000 7500 8000 CMP position [m] 200 400 600 800 Ray parameter [mu s/m]

Migration RLSM 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 D e p t h [ k m ] 200 400 600 800 10 20 30 40 50 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 Angle of incidence (deg) Reflection coefficient 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 D e p t h [ k m ] 200 400 600 800 Ray parameter [mu s/m] Migration RLSM

Incomplete CMP (30 %) Complete CMP 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 T i m e [ s c ] 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 T i m e [ s c ] 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Offset [m] Complete CMP Incomplete CMP (30 %)

Migration RLSM 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 D e p t h [ k m ] 200 400 600 800 200 400 600 800 Ray parameter [mu s/m] 10 20 30 40 50 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 Angle of incidence (deg) Reflection coefficient Migration RLSM

Constant ray parameter image (incomplete) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 D e p t h [ k m ] 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 CMP position [m] Constant ray parameter image (incomplete)

Constant ray parameter image (RLSM) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 D e p t h [ k m ] 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 CMP position [m] Constant ray parameter image (RLSM)

3D - Synthetic data example (J Wang) Parameters for the 3D synthetic data x-CDPs : 40 Y-CDPs : 301 Nominal Offset: 50 dx=5 m dy=10 m dh=10 m 90% traces are randomly removed to simulate a sparse 3D data.

Incomplete Data Reconstructed data (after 12 Iterations) 4 adjacent CDPs Reconstructed data (after 12 Iterations)

A B C A: Iteration 1 B: Iteration 3 C: Iteration 12

At y=950 m, x=130 m

Misfit Curve Convergence – Misfit vs. CG iterations

Stacked images comparison (x-line 30) A complete data B. Remove 90% traces C. least-squares

Field data example ERSKINE (WBC) orthogonal 3-D sparse land data set dx=50.29m dy=33.5m Comment on Importance of W

CIG at x-line #10, in-line #71 Iteration 1 Iteration 3 Iteration 7 Cost Optimization

Stacked image, in-line #71 Migration RLS Migration

Stacked image, in-line #71 Migration RLS Migration

Image and Common Image Gather (detail)

Image and Common Image Gather (detail)

Stacked Image (x-line #10) comparison Migration LS Migration

Non-quadratic regularization applied to imaging

Non-Quadratic Smoothing Non-quadratic regularization But first, a little about smoothing: Quadratic Smoothing Non-Quadratic Smoothing

Quadratic regularization ->Linear filters Non-quadratic -> Non-linear filters

Segmentation/Non-linear Smoothing

Segmentation/Non-linear Smoothing 1/Variance at edge position

2D Segmentation/Non-linear Smoothing

GRT Inversion - VSP (Carrie Youzwishen, MSc 2001) * To test the algorithm, we use a 2D VSP model. An area 1 km square with a maximum acoustic potential of 1 is evaluated. The source and receiver geometry is shown on the first figure. The middle box is the synthetic (diffracted) data with a SNR of 5. The remaining figure shows the damped least squares solution.

Dx Dz m

HR Migration (Current Direction) Quadratic constraint (Dp) to smooth along p (or h) Non-quadratic constraint to force vertical sparseness

Example: we compare migrated images m(x,z,h) for the following 3 imaging methods: Adj LS HR

Acoustic, Linearized, Constant V, Variable Density Synthetic Model X(m) True Z(m) m(x,z) When the observations contain additive nosie rather than trying to fit exactly al observations, we attempt to fit the obsearvation in least squares sense. In this case we minimize a cost function that combins a data misfit function in conjuction with the model norm. Acoustic, Linearized, Constant V, Variable Density

Pre-stack data d(s,g,t) Data When the observations contain additive nosie rather than trying to fit exactly al observations, we attempt to fit the obsearvation in least squares sense. In this case we minimize a cost function that combins a data misfit function in conjuction with the model norm. Shots d(s,g,t)

Common offset images m(x,z,h) Adj Z(m) CMP gather at 750m generated by a ray-tracing code. The code models (cylindrical) geometrical spreading but no transmission effects. The offset for the particular CMP ranges from 0m to 1280m. Middle: The same CMP after randomly removing of 90\% the data. Bottom: The reconstructed CMP using WMNI, the reconstructed offset ranges from 0m to 1200m. We first test our alogrithm on a simple, horizontally layered model. The horizontally layered model consists of four reflecting interfaces. The acoustic model parameters in terms of compressional velocities and densities range from 1900 m/s to 2500 m/s and from 1.6 g/$\textrm{cm}^3$ to 2.25 g/$\textrm{cm}^3$ , respectively. All interfaces are well separated. A ray tracing technique is used to generate the synthetic dataset. The ray-tracer takes advantage of the fact that, in a stratified medium, the ray parameter is constant for a particular ray. The geometrical spreading has been calculated assuming a cylindrical wavefront resulting in a $1 / \sqrt{r}$ amplitude scaling, where $r$ is the distance travelled by the ray. Notes that transmission losses is neglected in the synthetics. In Figure 1, top panel shows the CMP data at 750m. They exhibit a clear amplitude variation versus offset (AVO). the offsets range from 0 to 1295m incrementing by 20m. Figure 1 middle shows the same CMP after randomly removing $90$\% of the live traces. The incomplete CMPs (total 100) are used as the input for the reconstruction. We first perform Fourier transform along the time axis. Reconstructions are then carried at temporal frequencies along two spatial (CMP and offset) coordinates simultaneously. The output offset ranges 0m to 1200m for each CMP incrementing by 10m. Figure 1 bottom shows the reconstructed CMP at 750m using WMNI. m(x,z,h)

Common offset images LS Z(m) m(x,z,h)

Common offset images HR Z(m) m(x,z,h)

Stacked CIGs X(m) Adj Z(m) m(x,z)

Stacked CIGs X(m) LS Z(m) m(x,z)

Stacked CIGs m(x,z) HR X(m) Z(m) CMP gather at 750m generated by a ray-tracing code. The code models (cylindrical) geometrical spreading but no transmission effects. The offset for the particular CMP ranges from 0m to 1280m. Middle: The same CMP after randomly removing of 90\% the data. Bottom: The reconstructed CMP using WMNI, the reconstructed offset ranges from 0m to 1200m. We first test our alogrithm on a simple, horizontally layered model. The horizontally layered model consists of four reflecting interfaces. The acoustic model parameters in terms of compressional velocities and densities range from 1900 m/s to 2500 m/s and from 1.6 g/$\textrm{cm}^3$ to 2.25 g/$\textrm{cm}^3$ , respectively. All interfaces are well separated. A ray tracing technique is used to generate the synthetic dataset. The ray-tracer takes advantage of the fact that, in a stratified medium, the ray parameter is constant for a particular ray. The geometrical spreading has been calculated assuming a cylindrical wavefront resulting in a $1 / \sqrt{r}$ amplitude scaling, where $r$ is the distance travelled by the ray. Notes that transmission losses is neglected in the synthetics. In Figure 1, top panel shows the CMP data at 750m. They exhibit a clear amplitude variation versus offset (AVO). the offsets range from 0 to 1295m incrementing by 20m. Figure 1 middle shows the same CMP after randomly removing $90$\% of the live traces. The incomplete CMPs (total 100) are used as the input for the reconstruction. We first perform Fourier transform along the time axis. Reconstructions are then carried at temporal frequencies along two spatial (CMP and offset) coordinates simultaneously. The output offset ranges 0m to 1200m for each CMP incrementing by 10m. Figure 1 bottom shows the reconstructed CMP at 750m using WMNI.

CIGs CIG # 10 CIG # 11 CIG # 12 Adj LS Z(m) HR 0m Offset 380m

Data LS Prediction T(s) HR Prediction d(s,g,t) Shots

Conclusions Imaging/Inversion with the addition of quadratic and non-quadratic constraints could lead to a new class of imaging algorithms where the resolution of the inverted image can be enhanced beyond the limits imposed by the data (aperture and band-width). This is not a completely new idea. Exploration geophysicists have been using similar concepts to invert post-stack data (sparse spike inversion) and to design Radon operators. Finally, it is important to stress that any regularization strategy capable of enhancing the resolution of seismic images must be applied in the CIG domain. Continuity along the CIG horizontal variable (offset, angle, ray parameter) in conjunction with sparseness in depth, appears to be reasonable choice.

Acknowledgments EnCana Geo-X Veritas Schlumberger foundation NSERC AERI 3D Real data set was provided by Dr Cheadle