贝叶斯联合反演和 RMO 反演

GEOPHYSICS Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1190/geo2023-0371.1
Yanis Saadallah, A. Buland
{"title":"贝叶斯联合反演和 RMO 反演","authors":"Yanis Saadallah, A. Buland","doi":"10.1190/geo2023-0371.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Residual moveout (RMO) can have a severe impact on the seismic amplitude with offset (AVO) analysis. It is therefore common practice to quality control and correct the processed seismic data for RMO before AVO analysis. However, a complicating factor is that AVO effect and tuning may result in up- or down-dipping events that are easily mistaken for events with RMO, e.g., AVO Class 2p response. Flattening these events will lead to wrong AVO estimation. We present a new Bayesian joint RMO and AVO inversion to estimate RMO time shifts and AVO intercept and gradient. The joint inversion corrects the seismic data based on RMO and AVO prior models, rather than explicitly assuming that the data should be flattened. The prior models will typically guide towards flat gathers, but will also allow for up and down dipping events when these are possible within the prior model. The method is illustrated on synthetic and real seismic data. For cases where flat events are correct, the results are similar to sequential methods with RMO correction before AVO analysis, but in situations where dipping seismic reflectors may be misinterpreted as events with RMO, the joint inversion provides better results by evaluating RMO and AVO simultaneously. The inversion results include the posterior covariance matrix which represents uncertainties for the AVO intercept and gradient, the RMO time shifts, and the correlations between these at all samples. The RMO time shift uncertainty varies within seismic gathers and depends on how clear and well determined the seismic events are. The uncertainty of the RMO is lower for clear and continuous events, but increases in zones with weaker and noisy events. The uncertainty of the RMO time shifts has a low impact on the uncertainty of the AVO intercept, but increases the uncertainty of the AVO gradient significantly.","PeriodicalId":509604,"journal":{"name":"GEOPHYSICS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bayesian joint AVO and RMO inversion\",\"authors\":\"Yanis Saadallah, A. Buland\",\"doi\":\"10.1190/geo2023-0371.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Residual moveout (RMO) can have a severe impact on the seismic amplitude with offset (AVO) analysis. It is therefore common practice to quality control and correct the processed seismic data for RMO before AVO analysis. However, a complicating factor is that AVO effect and tuning may result in up- or down-dipping events that are easily mistaken for events with RMO, e.g., AVO Class 2p response. Flattening these events will lead to wrong AVO estimation. We present a new Bayesian joint RMO and AVO inversion to estimate RMO time shifts and AVO intercept and gradient. The joint inversion corrects the seismic data based on RMO and AVO prior models, rather than explicitly assuming that the data should be flattened. The prior models will typically guide towards flat gathers, but will also allow for up and down dipping events when these are possible within the prior model. The method is illustrated on synthetic and real seismic data. For cases where flat events are correct, the results are similar to sequential methods with RMO correction before AVO analysis, but in situations where dipping seismic reflectors may be misinterpreted as events with RMO, the joint inversion provides better results by evaluating RMO and AVO simultaneously. The inversion results include the posterior covariance matrix which represents uncertainties for the AVO intercept and gradient, the RMO time shifts, and the correlations between these at all samples. The RMO time shift uncertainty varies within seismic gathers and depends on how clear and well determined the seismic events are. The uncertainty of the RMO is lower for clear and continuous events, but increases in zones with weaker and noisy events. The uncertainty of the RMO time shifts has a low impact on the uncertainty of the AVO intercept, but increases the uncertainty of the AVO gradient significantly.\",\"PeriodicalId\":509604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"GEOPHYSICS\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"GEOPHYSICS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2023-0371.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GEOPHYSICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2023-0371.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

残余偏移(RMO)会对地震振幅偏移(AVO)分析产生严重影响。因此,通常的做法是在 AVO 分析之前对处理过的地震数据进行质量控制和 RMO 校正。然而,一个复杂的因素是,AVO 效应和调谐可能导致上倾或下倾事件,很容易被误认为是 RMO 事件,例如 AVO 2p 级响应。将这些事件平坦化将导致错误的 AVO 估计。我们提出了一种新的贝叶斯 RMO 和 AVO 联合反演方法,以估算 RMO 时移和 AVO 截距与梯度。联合反演根据 RMO 和 AVO 先验模型对地震数据进行校正,而不是明确假设数据应被平坦化。先验模型通常会引导平坦采集,但如果先验模型中可能出现上倾和下倾事件,也会允许出现上倾和下倾事件。该方法在合成和真实地震数据上进行了说明。在平坦事件是正确的情况下,其结果与先进行 RMO 校正再进行 AVO 分析的连续方法相似,但在倾斜地震反射体可能被误解为 RMO 事件的情况下,联合反演通过同时评估 RMO 和 AVO,可提供更好的结果。反演结果包括后协方差矩阵,该矩阵表示所有样本中 AVO 截距和梯度、RMO 时移以及它们之间相关性的不确定性。RMO 时移的不确定性在地震采集中各不相同,取决于地震事件的清晰度和确定性。对于清晰和连续的事件,RMO 的不确定性较低,但在事件较弱和噪声较大的区域,RMO 的不确定性会增加。RMO 时移的不确定性对 AVO 截距的不确定性影响较小,但会显著增加 AVO 梯度的不确定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bayesian joint AVO and RMO inversion
Residual moveout (RMO) can have a severe impact on the seismic amplitude with offset (AVO) analysis. It is therefore common practice to quality control and correct the processed seismic data for RMO before AVO analysis. However, a complicating factor is that AVO effect and tuning may result in up- or down-dipping events that are easily mistaken for events with RMO, e.g., AVO Class 2p response. Flattening these events will lead to wrong AVO estimation. We present a new Bayesian joint RMO and AVO inversion to estimate RMO time shifts and AVO intercept and gradient. The joint inversion corrects the seismic data based on RMO and AVO prior models, rather than explicitly assuming that the data should be flattened. The prior models will typically guide towards flat gathers, but will also allow for up and down dipping events when these are possible within the prior model. The method is illustrated on synthetic and real seismic data. For cases where flat events are correct, the results are similar to sequential methods with RMO correction before AVO analysis, but in situations where dipping seismic reflectors may be misinterpreted as events with RMO, the joint inversion provides better results by evaluating RMO and AVO simultaneously. The inversion results include the posterior covariance matrix which represents uncertainties for the AVO intercept and gradient, the RMO time shifts, and the correlations between these at all samples. The RMO time shift uncertainty varies within seismic gathers and depends on how clear and well determined the seismic events are. The uncertainty of the RMO is lower for clear and continuous events, but increases in zones with weaker and noisy events. The uncertainty of the RMO time shifts has a low impact on the uncertainty of the AVO intercept, but increases the uncertainty of the AVO gradient significantly.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Robust unsupervised 5D seismic data reconstruction on both regular and irregular grid Effect of fluid patch clustering on the P-wave velocity-saturation relation: a critical saturation model Strategic Geosteering Workflow with Uncertainty Quantification and Deep Learning: Initial Test on the Goliat Field Data Review on 3D electromagnetic modeling and inversion for Mineral Exploration High dynamic range land wavefield reconstruction from randomized acquisition
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1