ARTICLE

Wavenumber recovery by FWI from slowness-limited, and source-frequency-limited elastic seismic data

SASMITA MOHAPATRA GEORGE A. MCMECHAN
Show Less
Center for Lithospheric Studies, The University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Road, Richardson, TX 75080-3021, U.S.A.,
JSE 2021, 30(6), 577–600;
Submitted: 28 July 2021 | Accepted: 25 October 2021 | Published: 1 December 2021
© 2021 by the Authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Abstract

Mohapatra, S. and McMechan, G.A., 2021. Wavenumber recovery by FWI from slowness-limited, and source-frequency-limited elastic seismic data. Journal of Seismic Exploration, 30: 577-600. Any feature in an elastic model can be extracted by full wavefield inversion (FWI) only if its physical wavenumbers (k) are also present in the illuminating and recorded wavefields. The effective incident wavenumbers contain the combined information in the incident wavefront directions (in the slownesses p) and in the frequencies o (in the source time function). The fundamental relationship is k = wp. Thus, the wavenumber spectral aperture of surface data can be increased by increasing the effective slowness aperture (e.g., by increasing the offset, or adding data from borehole recorders) and/or by increasing the frequency bandwidth of the source wavelet. For a given k, w and p are not unique; an infinite number of (@, p) pairs can provide the same k, but only if both are present. Because the acquisition geometry and the source spectral bandwidth are both discrete and finite, the wavenumber spectra of the inverted parameters of any target model can never be fully recovered by FWI; FWI images are always a bandlimited version of the complete solution. A prerequisite for minimizing cycle skipping in FWI is that the temporal and spatial sampling of the data and the model must be unaliased, and therefore satisfy the half-wavelength condition as the frequency is progressively increased during the FWI iterations. The phase of the data provides stronger constraints than the amplitude; thus velocities are better, fitted than densities. Image correlation, and calculation of the correlation coefficient (R° ) of model images quantify the behavior of decreasing model misfits as iterations proceed. Synthetic elastic examples for models containing finite bandwidths illustrate how the ability to recover wavenumbers is limited by the wavenumber information that is contained in the illuminating wavefield, and by the sampling of the data in both time and space.

Keywords
2D
FWI
elastic
slowness
frequency
wavenumber
References
  1. Alkhalifah, T., 2016. Full-model wavenumber inversion: An emphasis on the appropriatewavenumber continuation. Geophysics, 81(3): R89-R98.
  2. Alkhalifah, T. and Wu, Z., 2016. Multiscattering inversion for low-model wavenumbers.Geophysics, 81(6): R417-R428.
  3. Alkhalifah, T., 2018. Full model wavenumber inversion: Identifying sources ofinformation for the elusive middle model wavenumbers. Geophysics, 83(6):R597-R610.
  4. Berkhout, A.J., 1980. Seismic Migration. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.
  5. Berkhout, A.J., Ongkiehong, L., Volker, A.W.F. and Blacquiére, G., 2001.
  6. Comprehensive assessment of seismic acquisition geometries by focal beams 一
  7. Part I: Theoretical considerations. Geophysics, 66: 911-917.
  8. Beylkin, G., 1985. Imaging of discontinuities in the inverse scattering problem byinversion of a causal generalized Radon transform. J. Mathem. Phys., 26: 99-108.
  9. Biondi, B. and Almomon, A., 2014. Simultaneous inversion of full data bandwidth bytomographic full-waveform inversion. Geophysics, 79(3): WA129-WA140.
  10. Brossier, R., Operto, S. and Virieux, J., 2009. Seismic imaging of complex onshorestructures by 2D elastic frequency-domain full-waveform inversion. Geophysics,74(6): WCC105-WCC118.
  11. Choi, Y., Min, D. and Shin, C., 2008. Two-dimensional waveform inversion ofmulticomponent data in acoustic-elastic coupled media. Geophys. Prosp., 56:863-881.
  12. Devaney, A.J., 1984. Geophysical diffraction tomography. IEEE Transact. Geosci.Remote Sens., GE(22): 3-13.
  13. Devaney, A.J. and Beylkin, G., 1984. Diffraction tomography using arbitrary transmitterand receiver surfaces. Ultrason. Imag., 6: 181-193.
  14. Esmersoy, C., Oristaglio, M.L. and Levy, B.C., 1985. Multi-dimensional Born velocityinversion single wideband point source. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 78: 1052-1057.
  15. Esmersoy, C. and Levy, B.C., 1986. Multidimensional Born inversion with a wide-bandplane wave source. IEEE Proc., 74: 466-475.
  16. Fichtner, A., 2010. Full Seismic Waveform Modelling and Inversion. Springer Verlag,Heidelberg.
  17. Forgues, E. and Lambaré, G., 1997. Parameterization study for acoustic and elastic ray +Born inversion. J. Seismic Explor., 6: 253-278.
  18. Gibson, Jr., L.R. and Tzimeas, C., 2002. Quantitative measures of image resolution forseismic survey design. Geophysics, 67: 1844-1852.
  19. Jeong, W., Lee, H. and Min, D., 2012. Full waveform inversion strategy for density inthe frequency domain. Geophys. J. Internat., 188: 1221-1242.
  20. Lailly, P., 1983. The seismic inverse problem as a sequence of before stack migration.
  21. Expanded Abstr., SIAM Conf. on Inverse Scattering, Theory and Applications,Philadelphia: 277-289.
  22. Liner, C.L., 2012. Elements of seismic dispersion. A somewhat practical guide tofrequency dependent phenomena. Expanded Abstr., 82nd Ann. Internat. SEG Mtg.,Las Vegas: 63-65.
  23. McMechan, G.A. and Hu., L.Z., 1986. On the effect of recording aperture in migration ofvertical seismic profile data. Geophysics, 51: 2007-2010.
  24. Martin, G.S., Wiley, R. and Marfurt, K.J., 2006. Marmousi2: An elastic upgrade forMarmousi. The Leading Edge, 25: 156-166.
  25. Muerdter, D. and Ratcliff, D., 2001a. Understanding subsalt illumination throughraytrace modeling. Part 1: Simple 2-D salt models. The Leading Edge, 20: 578-594.
  26. Muerdter, D. and Ratcliff, D., 2001b. Understanding subsalt illumination throughraytrace modeling, Part 3: Salt ridges and furrows, and the impact of acquisitionorientation. The Leading Edge, 20: 803-816.
  27. Mora, P., 1987. Nonlinear two-dimensional elastic inversion of multi-offset seismic data.Geophysics, 52: 1211-1228.
  28. Mora, P., 1989. Inversion = migration + tomography. Geophysics, 54: 1575-1586.
  29. Ozdenvar, T., McMechan, G.A. and Chaney, P., 1996. Simulation of complete seismicsurveys for optimization of experiment design and processing. Geophysics, 61:496-508.
  30. Pageot, D., Operto, S., Vallee, M., Brossier, R. and Virieux, J., 2013. A parametricanalysis of two-dimensional elastic full waveform inversion of teleseismic data forlithospheric imaging. Geophys. J. Internat., 193: 1479-1505.
  31. Pratt, R.G., Song, Z.-M., Williamson, P. and Warner, M., 1996. Two-dimensionalvelocity models from wide angle seismic data by wave-field inversion. Geophys. J.Internat., 124: 323-340.
  32. Schuster, G.T. and Hu, J., 2000. Green’s function for migration: Continuous recordinggeometry. Geophysics, 65: 167-175.
  33. Schuster, G.T., Yu, J. and Sheng, J., 2004. Interferometric/daylight seismic imaging.Geophys. J. Internat., 157: 838-852.
  34. Sears, J.T., Barton, P.J. and Singh, S.C., 2010. Elastic full waveform inversion ofmulticomponent ocean-bottom cable seismic data: Application to Alba Field, U.K.North Sea. Geophysics, 75(6): R109-R119.
  35. Slaney, M. and Kak, A.C., 1983. Diffraction tomography. Proc., SPIE Conf. InverseOptics, 0413: 2-19.
  36. Shin, C., 1995. Sponge boundary condition for frequency-domain modeling. Geophysics,60: 1870-1874.
  37. Tarantola, A., 1984. Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation.Geophysics, 49: 1259-1266.
  38. Vermeer, G.J.O., 2012. 3D Seismic Survey Design, 2nd Ed. SEG, Tulsa, OK.
  39. Virieux, J. and Operto, S., 2009. An overview of full-waveform inversion in explorationgeophysics. Geophysics, 74(6): WCC127-WCC152.
  40. Volker, A.W.F., Blacquiére, G., Berkhout, A.J. and Ongkiehong, L., 2001.
  41. Comprehensive assessment of seismic acquisition geometries by focal beams-Part II.
  42. Practical aspects and examples. Geophysics, 66: 918-931.
  43. Warner, M., Ratcliffe, A., Nangoo, T., Morgan, J., Umpleby, A., Shah, N., Vinje, V. and
  44. Stekl, I, 2013. Anisotropic 3D full-waveform inversion. Geophysics, 78(2):R59-R80.
  45. Wu, R.S. and Toks6z, M.N., 1987. Diffraction tomography and multi-source holography,applied to seismic imaging. Geophysics, 52: 11-25.
  46. Xu, K. and McMechan, G.A., 2014. 2D frequency-domain elastic full-waveforminversion using time-domain modeling and a multistep-length gradient approach.Geophysics, 79(2): R41-R53.
  47. Xu, W., Wang, T. and Cheng, J., 2019. Elastic model low- to intermediate-wavenumberinversion using reflection traveltime and waveform of multicomponent seismic data.Geophysics, 84(1): R109-R123.
  48. Yu, J. and Schuster, G.T., 2003. 3-D prestack migration deconvolution. Expanded Abstr.,73rd Ann. Internat. SEG Mtg., Dallas: 1651-1654.
  49. Yu, J. and Schuster, G.T., 2006. Cross-correlogram migration of inverse vertical seismicprofile data. Geophysics, 71(1): S1-S11.
Share
Back to top
Journal of Seismic Exploration, Electronic ISSN: 0963-0651 Print ISSN: 0963-0651, Published by AccScience Publishing