Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion

ABSTRACT Least‐squares inversion of seismic reflection waveform data can reconstruct remarkably detailed models of subsurface structure and take into account essentially any physics of seismic wave propagation that can be modelled. However, the waveform inversion objective has many spurious local mi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Geophysical Prospecting 2008-11, Vol.56 (6), p.765-790
1. Verfasser: Symes, William W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 790
container_issue 6
container_start_page 765
container_title Geophysical Prospecting
container_volume 56
creator Symes, William W.
description ABSTRACT Least‐squares inversion of seismic reflection waveform data can reconstruct remarkably detailed models of subsurface structure and take into account essentially any physics of seismic wave propagation that can be modelled. However, the waveform inversion objective has many spurious local minima, hence convergence of descent methods (mandatory because of problem size) to useful Earth models requires accurate initial estimates of long‐scale velocity structure. Migration velocity analysis, on the other hand, is capable of correcting substantially erroneous initial estimates of velocity at long scales. Migration velocity analysis is based on prestack depth migration, which is in turn based on linearized acoustic modelling (Born or single‐scattering approximation). Two major variants of prestack depth migration, using binning of surface data and Claerbout's survey‐sinking concept respectively, are in widespread use. Each type of prestack migration produces an image volume depending on redundant parameters and supplies a condition on the image volume, which expresses consistency between data and velocity model and is hence a basis for velocity analysis. The survey‐sinking (depth‐oriented) approach to prestack migration is less subject to kinematic artefacts than is the binning‐based (surface‐oriented) approach. Because kinematic artefacts strongly violate the consistency or semblance conditions, this observation suggests that velocity analysis based on depth‐oriented prestack migration may be more appropriate in kinematically complex areas. Appropriate choice of objective (differential semblance) turns either form of migration velocity analysis into an optimization problem, for which Newton‐like methods exhibit little tendency to stagnate at nonglobal minima. The extended modelling concept links migration velocity analysis to the apparently unrelated waveform inversion approach to estimation of Earth structure: from this point of view, migration velocity analysis is a solution method for the linearized waveform inversion problem. Extended modelling also provides a basis for a nonlinear generalization of migration velocity analysis. Preliminary numerical evidence suggests a new approach to nonlinear waveform inversion, which may combine the global convergence of velocity analysis with the physical fidelity of model‐based data fitting.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00698.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_19719522</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>19719522</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a4548-8a058112902c726aa898622b8345220bced355dffc1b92b6c23768ecb74464b93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwD1mxS_A7jsQGBWiR2oIQiKXluA5ySZNip4_8PQ5BXTObudLcM4sDQIRggsLcrBJEOIsxTUWCIRQJhDwTyeEEjI6HUzCCEPFYQMzOwYX3KwgJZIyOAJ7bT6da29TRzlSNtm0XqVpVnbc-hGW0VztTNm4d2XpnnA_FS3BWqsqbq789Bu-PD2_5NJ49T57yu1msKKMiFgoygRDOINYp5kqJTHCMC0EowxgW2iwJY8uy1KjIcME1JikXRhcppZwWGRmD6-HvxjXfW-NbubZem6pStWm2XqIsRVl4FYpiKGrXeO9MKTfOrpXrJIKylyRXsnchexeylyR_JclDQG8HdG8r0_2bk5OX1xACHg-49a05HHHlviRPScrkx2IiF_l0fj9d5DInP2Yte5k</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>19719522</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Symes, William W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Symes, William W.</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT Least‐squares inversion of seismic reflection waveform data can reconstruct remarkably detailed models of subsurface structure and take into account essentially any physics of seismic wave propagation that can be modelled. However, the waveform inversion objective has many spurious local minima, hence convergence of descent methods (mandatory because of problem size) to useful Earth models requires accurate initial estimates of long‐scale velocity structure. Migration velocity analysis, on the other hand, is capable of correcting substantially erroneous initial estimates of velocity at long scales. Migration velocity analysis is based on prestack depth migration, which is in turn based on linearized acoustic modelling (Born or single‐scattering approximation). Two major variants of prestack depth migration, using binning of surface data and Claerbout's survey‐sinking concept respectively, are in widespread use. Each type of prestack migration produces an image volume depending on redundant parameters and supplies a condition on the image volume, which expresses consistency between data and velocity model and is hence a basis for velocity analysis. The survey‐sinking (depth‐oriented) approach to prestack migration is less subject to kinematic artefacts than is the binning‐based (surface‐oriented) approach. Because kinematic artefacts strongly violate the consistency or semblance conditions, this observation suggests that velocity analysis based on depth‐oriented prestack migration may be more appropriate in kinematically complex areas. Appropriate choice of objective (differential semblance) turns either form of migration velocity analysis into an optimization problem, for which Newton‐like methods exhibit little tendency to stagnate at nonglobal minima. The extended modelling concept links migration velocity analysis to the apparently unrelated waveform inversion approach to estimation of Earth structure: from this point of view, migration velocity analysis is a solution method for the linearized waveform inversion problem. Extended modelling also provides a basis for a nonlinear generalization of migration velocity analysis. Preliminary numerical evidence suggests a new approach to nonlinear waveform inversion, which may combine the global convergence of velocity analysis with the physical fidelity of model‐based data fitting.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-8025</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2478</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00698.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><ispartof>Geophysical Prospecting, 2008-11, Vol.56 (6), p.765-790</ispartof><rights>2008 European Association of Geoscientists &amp; Engineers</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a4548-8a058112902c726aa898622b8345220bced355dffc1b92b6c23768ecb74464b93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a4548-8a058112902c726aa898622b8345220bced355dffc1b92b6c23768ecb74464b93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1365-2478.2008.00698.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1365-2478.2008.00698.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Symes, William W.</creatorcontrib><title>Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion</title><title>Geophysical Prospecting</title><description>ABSTRACT Least‐squares inversion of seismic reflection waveform data can reconstruct remarkably detailed models of subsurface structure and take into account essentially any physics of seismic wave propagation that can be modelled. However, the waveform inversion objective has many spurious local minima, hence convergence of descent methods (mandatory because of problem size) to useful Earth models requires accurate initial estimates of long‐scale velocity structure. Migration velocity analysis, on the other hand, is capable of correcting substantially erroneous initial estimates of velocity at long scales. Migration velocity analysis is based on prestack depth migration, which is in turn based on linearized acoustic modelling (Born or single‐scattering approximation). Two major variants of prestack depth migration, using binning of surface data and Claerbout's survey‐sinking concept respectively, are in widespread use. Each type of prestack migration produces an image volume depending on redundant parameters and supplies a condition on the image volume, which expresses consistency between data and velocity model and is hence a basis for velocity analysis. The survey‐sinking (depth‐oriented) approach to prestack migration is less subject to kinematic artefacts than is the binning‐based (surface‐oriented) approach. Because kinematic artefacts strongly violate the consistency or semblance conditions, this observation suggests that velocity analysis based on depth‐oriented prestack migration may be more appropriate in kinematically complex areas. Appropriate choice of objective (differential semblance) turns either form of migration velocity analysis into an optimization problem, for which Newton‐like methods exhibit little tendency to stagnate at nonglobal minima. The extended modelling concept links migration velocity analysis to the apparently unrelated waveform inversion approach to estimation of Earth structure: from this point of view, migration velocity analysis is a solution method for the linearized waveform inversion problem. Extended modelling also provides a basis for a nonlinear generalization of migration velocity analysis. Preliminary numerical evidence suggests a new approach to nonlinear waveform inversion, which may combine the global convergence of velocity analysis with the physical fidelity of model‐based data fitting.</description><issn>0016-8025</issn><issn>1365-2478</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwD1mxS_A7jsQGBWiR2oIQiKXluA5ySZNip4_8PQ5BXTObudLcM4sDQIRggsLcrBJEOIsxTUWCIRQJhDwTyeEEjI6HUzCCEPFYQMzOwYX3KwgJZIyOAJ7bT6da29TRzlSNtm0XqVpVnbc-hGW0VztTNm4d2XpnnA_FS3BWqsqbq789Bu-PD2_5NJ49T57yu1msKKMiFgoygRDOINYp5kqJTHCMC0EowxgW2iwJY8uy1KjIcME1JikXRhcppZwWGRmD6-HvxjXfW-NbubZem6pStWm2XqIsRVl4FYpiKGrXeO9MKTfOrpXrJIKylyRXsnchexeylyR_JclDQG8HdG8r0_2bk5OX1xACHg-49a05HHHlviRPScrkx2IiF_l0fj9d5DInP2Yte5k</recordid><startdate>200811</startdate><enddate>200811</enddate><creator>Symes, William W.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200811</creationdate><title>Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion</title><author>Symes, William W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a4548-8a058112902c726aa898622b8345220bced355dffc1b92b6c23768ecb74464b93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Symes, William W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Geophysical Prospecting</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Symes, William W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion</atitle><jtitle>Geophysical Prospecting</jtitle><date>2008-11</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>765</spage><epage>790</epage><pages>765-790</pages><issn>0016-8025</issn><eissn>1365-2478</eissn><abstract>ABSTRACT Least‐squares inversion of seismic reflection waveform data can reconstruct remarkably detailed models of subsurface structure and take into account essentially any physics of seismic wave propagation that can be modelled. However, the waveform inversion objective has many spurious local minima, hence convergence of descent methods (mandatory because of problem size) to useful Earth models requires accurate initial estimates of long‐scale velocity structure. Migration velocity analysis, on the other hand, is capable of correcting substantially erroneous initial estimates of velocity at long scales. Migration velocity analysis is based on prestack depth migration, which is in turn based on linearized acoustic modelling (Born or single‐scattering approximation). Two major variants of prestack depth migration, using binning of surface data and Claerbout's survey‐sinking concept respectively, are in widespread use. Each type of prestack migration produces an image volume depending on redundant parameters and supplies a condition on the image volume, which expresses consistency between data and velocity model and is hence a basis for velocity analysis. The survey‐sinking (depth‐oriented) approach to prestack migration is less subject to kinematic artefacts than is the binning‐based (surface‐oriented) approach. Because kinematic artefacts strongly violate the consistency or semblance conditions, this observation suggests that velocity analysis based on depth‐oriented prestack migration may be more appropriate in kinematically complex areas. Appropriate choice of objective (differential semblance) turns either form of migration velocity analysis into an optimization problem, for which Newton‐like methods exhibit little tendency to stagnate at nonglobal minima. The extended modelling concept links migration velocity analysis to the apparently unrelated waveform inversion approach to estimation of Earth structure: from this point of view, migration velocity analysis is a solution method for the linearized waveform inversion problem. Extended modelling also provides a basis for a nonlinear generalization of migration velocity analysis. Preliminary numerical evidence suggests a new approach to nonlinear waveform inversion, which may combine the global convergence of velocity analysis with the physical fidelity of model‐based data fitting.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00698.x</doi><tpages>26</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0016-8025
ispartof Geophysical Prospecting, 2008-11, Vol.56 (6), p.765-790
issn 0016-8025
1365-2478
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_19719522
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
title Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-15T08%3A17%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Migration%20velocity%20analysis%20and%20waveform%20inversion&rft.jtitle=Geophysical%20Prospecting&rft.au=Symes,%20William%20W.&rft.date=2008-11&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=765&rft.epage=790&rft.pages=765-790&rft.issn=0016-8025&rft.eissn=1365-2478&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00698.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E19719522%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=19719522&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true