Methods for approximating hessian times vector operation in full wavefield inversion

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9176930
  • Patent Number
    9,176,930
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, October 18, 2012
    11 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 3, 2015
    8 years ago
Abstract
Method for estimating the Hessian of the objective function, times a vector, in order to compute an update in an iterative optimization solution to a partial differential equation such as the wave equation, used for example in full wave field inversion of seismic data. The Hessian times vector operation is approximated as one forward wave propagation (24) and one gradient computation (25) in a modified subsurface model (23). The modified subsurface model may be a linear combination of the current subsurface model (20) and the vector (21) to be multiplied by the Hessian matrix. The forward-modeled data from the modified model are treated as a field measurement in the data residual of the objective function for the gradient computation in the modified model. In model parameter estimation by iterative inversion of geophysical data, the vector in the first iteration may be the gradient of the objective function.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates generally to the field of geophysical prospecting and, more particularly, to seismic data processing. Specifically, the invention is a method for faster estimation of a quantity known as Hessian times vector which arises in certain methods for numerical solving of partial differential equations, for example iterative inversion of seismic data to infer elastic properties of a medium, involving forward modeling of synthetic data by solving the wave equation in a model medium.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Full wavefield inversion (FWI) in exploration seismic processing relies on the calculation of the gradient of an objective function with respect to the subsurface model parameters [9]. The gradient of the objective function is used to calculate an update to the model. An objective function E is usually given as an L2 norm as










E
=


1
2














p


(


r
g

,


r
s

;
t


)


-


p
b



(


r
g

,


r
s

;
t


)





2




t









S
g










S
s








,




(
1
)








where p and pb are the measured pressure, i.e. seismic amplitude, and the modeled pressure in the background subsurface model at the receiver location rg for a shot located at rs. In iterative inversion processes, the background medium is typically the medium resulting from the previous inversion cycle. In non-iterative inversion processes or migrations, the background medium is typically derived using conventional seismic processing techniques such as migration velocity analysis. The objective function is integrated over all time t, and the surfaces Sg and Ss that are defined by the spread of the receivers and the shots. We define Kd(r)=K(r)−Kb(r) and ρd(r)=ρ(r)−ρb(r), where K(r) and ρ(r) are the true bulk modulus and density, and Kb(r) and ρb(r) are the bulk modulus and the density of the background model at the subsurface location r. (Bulk modulus is used as an example here, but any of the 21 elastic constants might be used instead.) We also define the difference between the measured and the modeled pressure to be pd(rg, rs; t)=p(rg, rs; t)−pb(rg, rs; t).


The measured pressure p, satisfies the wave equation












ρ








·

(


1
ρ




p


)




-


ρ
K



p
¨



=


-

q


(
t
)





δ


(

r
-

r
s


)




,




(
2
)








where q(t) is the source signature. It can be shown that the gradient of the objective function E with respect to the bulk modulus Kb(r), for example, is given as















E





K
b



(
r
)




=



-








p
d






p
b






K
b



(
r
)







t









S
g










S
s













=







-




ρ
b



(
r
)





V




K
b
2



(
r
)













p
.

b



(

r
,


r
s

;
t


)









ρ
b



(

r
g

)




ρ
b



(
r
)






g
b



(

r
,


r
g

;

-
t



)


*















p
.

d



(


r
g

,


r
s

;
t


)










S
g









t









S
s



,











(
3
)








where gb is the Green's function in the background medium, and dV is an infinitesimal volume around r [9, 3]. The equations for the gradients of other subsurface medium parameters in general elastic cases can be found in Refs. [10, 6, 1]. One can then perform full wavefield inversion by minimizing the value of the objective function E in an iterative manner, using gradient equations for the medium parameters such as that in Eq. 3.


The convergence rate of full wavefield inversion can be improved when information on the Hessian of the objective function E is employed in the inversion process [7, 5]. The Hessian is a matrix of second partial derivatives of a function. The Hessian (with respect to the physical property bulk modulus) of the objective function E in Eq. 1 is given as













2


E






K
b



(
r
)








K
b



(

r


)





=








[






p
d






K
b



(
r
)









p
d






K
b



(

r


)





+


p
d






2



p
d







K
b



(
r
)








K
b



(

r


)







]




t









S
s











S
g


.









(
4
)








The second term in the right-hand side is the term responsible for multiple scattering, and is often ignored due to difficulty in evaluation [11]. By dropping this second term, one obtains the equation for the Gauss-Newton Hessian,













2


E






K
b



(
r
)








K
b



(

r


)

















p
d






K
b



(
r
)









p
d






K
b



(

r


)







t









S
s











S
g


.









(
5
)







Once the Hessian matrix is computed, the medium parameter update required for the minimization of E can be obtained by multiplying the inverse of the Hessian matrix and the gradient using the Newton's method [5]:








K
d



(
r
)


=


-


(




2


E






K
b



(
r
)








K
b



(

r


)





)


-
1



·



E





K
b



(
r
)










Direct computation of the inverse of the Hessian matrix, however, often requires prohibitively large memory space in full wavefield inversion, and so the inverse of the Hessian is computed iteratively using the conjugate gradient (CG) method. This iterative scheme is often referred to as Newton-CG method, which may be used on either the full Hessian from equation 4 or the Gauss-Newton Hessian from equation 5. An example of this Newton-CG method can be found in Algorithm 7.1 of Ref [5], which is reproduced below. For notational convenience, we use H for the Hessian matrix, and ∇E for the gradient vector.















1.
Define tolerance δ = min(0.5, {square root over (∥∇E∥)}) ∥∇E∥


2.
Set z0 = 0, r0 = ∇E, {tilde over (K)}0 = −∇E


3.
For j = 0, 1, 2,...


 a.
If {tilde over (K)}jTH{tilde over (K)}j ≦ 0









 i. If j = 0









1. Return Kd = −∇E









ii. Else









1. Return Kd = zj








 b.
Set lj = rjTrj / {tilde over (K)}jTH{tilde over (K)}j


 c.
Set zj+1 = zj + ljdj


 d.
Set rj+1 = rj + ljH{tilde over (K)}j


 e.
If ∥ rj+1 ∥< δ









 i. Return Kd = zj+1








 f.
Set βj+1 = rj+1Trj+1 / rjTrj


 g.
Set {tilde over (K)}j+1 = −rj+1 + βj+1{tilde over (K)}j


4.
Perform line search using Kd as the search direction for the medium







parameter update, starting with the step size of 1 if possible.










The algorithm above requires repeated evaluation of the Hessian times vector H{tilde over (K)}j in a loop, where {tilde over (K)}j for j=0 is set as the negative of the gradient. The value of H{tilde over (K)}j is then used to update zj, which eventually becomes the inverse of the Hessian times gradient Kd in 3.a.ii.1 or 3.e.i.


The Newton-CG method requires evaluation of the Hessian matrix times (i.e. multiplied by) a medium perturbation vector {tilde over (K)}, which may be referred to hereafter in this document as the (Gauss-Newton) “Hessian times vector,”



















2


E






K
b



(
r
)








K
b



(

r


)








K
~



(

r


)





V



=








[











p
d






K
b



(
r
)









p
d






K
b



(

r


)







t





S
s






S
g






]









K
~



(

r


)






V













=
















p
d






K
b



(
r
)




[







p
d






K
b



(

r


)







K
~



(

r


)






V





]












t





S
s






S
g



,











(
6
)








where the Hessian has been approximated as the Gauss-Newton Hessian. For example, in the estimation of parameters of a physical property model by iterative inversion of geophysical data, the medium perturbation vector will typically initially be the gradient (in model parameter space) of the objective function. As the iterations progress, this vector will gradually diverge from being the gradient, and lose physical meaning as such. Equation (6) may be evaluated by performing two forward-wave-propagation and two reverse-wave-propagation computations. The present invention is a method that allows this equation to be evaluated by performing only one forward-wave-propagation (one forward solve of a partial differential equation, such as the wave equation) and one reverse-wave-propagation computation (i.e., one gradient computation of the objective function), resulting in valuable saving of computer time.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In one embodiment, the invention is a method for determining a discrete physical properties model of a subsurface region, which may be referred to as the “model,” by iteratively inverting measured geophysical data acquired from the subsurface region, comprising using a Hessian matrix of an objective function, then times a vector, called “Hessian times vector,” to determine an update for the model, wherein the Hessian times vector is approximated, using a computer, with a single forward-wave simulated propagation and a single computation of gradient of the objective function, in a modified subsurface model.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present invention and its advantages will be better understood by referring to the following detailed description and the attached drawings in which:



FIG. 1 is a graph comparing the convergence rate of full waveform inversion using the present inventive method as compared to the traditional method for estimating the Hessian times vector, in the test example using the models from FIGS. 3A and 3B;



FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing basic steps in one embodiment of the present inventive method; and



FIG. 3A shows a “true” subsurface velocity model for generating seismic data in a synthetic test example of the present inventive method, and FIG. 3B shows the initial velocity model used in iterative full wavefield inversion employing the method of the present invention.





The invention will be described in connection with example embodiments. However, to the extent that the following detailed description is specific to a particular embodiment or a particular use of the invention, this is intended to be illustrative only, and is not to be construed as limiting the scope of the invention. On the contrary, it is intended to cover all alternatives, modifications and equivalents that may be included within the scope of the invention, as defined by the appended claims. Persons skilled in the technical field will readily recognize that all practical applications of the present inventive method are performed using a computer programmed according to the disclosure herein.


DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EXAMPLE EMBODIMENTS

Let






(
7
)

















p
d



(


r
g

,


r
s

;
t


)







K
b



(

r


)







K
~



(

r


)






V





=



-








p
b



(


r
g

,


r
s

;
t


)







K
b



(

r


)







K
~



(

r


)






V












=



-






ρ



V




K
b
2



(

r


)





[



g
b



(


r
g

,


r


;
t


)


*



p
¨

b



(


r


,


r
s

;
t


)



]





K
~



(

r


)






V












=



-




p


d



(


r
g

,


r
s

;
t


)


.










It may be noted that Eq. 7 is the equation for the Born scattered field {tilde over (p)}d, where {tilde over (K)} behaves as a scatterer distribution in the background medium with bulk modulus Kb. The Gauss-Newton Hessian times vector can then be seen as



















2


E






K
b



(
r
)








K
b



(

r


)








K
~



(

r


)






V





=



-









p
~

d






p
d






K
b



(
r
)







t









S

s















S
g













=











p
~

d






p
b






K
b



(
r
)







t









S
s











S
g


.












(
8
)








Therefore, computation of the Gauss-Newton Hessian times vector is equivalent to gradient computation using artificial residual {tilde over (p)}d. As mentioned above, the artificial residual {tilde over (p)}d is computed using the Born approximation in the background model with scatterers {tilde over (K)}. If the wave equation is linear so that the Born approximation is exact, and if {tilde over (K)}=K−Kb=Kd, then the artificial residual {tilde over (p)}d=pd. Therefore, the negative of Hessian times vector above should be equal to the gradient in this case.


It may be noted that the Born scattered field {tilde over (p)}d in Eq. 7 can be approximated as












p
~


d
,
F


=


1
ɛ



(



p
~

F

-

p
b


)



,




(
9
)








where {tilde over (p)}F is the solution to the wave equation













2





p
~

F



(
r
)



-


ρ



K
b



(
r
)


+

ɛ



K
~



(
r
)










p
~

¨

F



(
r
)




=


-

q


(
t
)






δ


(

r
-

r
s


)


.






(
10
)








If ε in Eq. 10 is sufficiently small, {tilde over (p)}F should be approximately equal to the summation of pb and the Born scattered field due to ò{tilde over (K)}. Since the amplitude of Born scattering is linear with respect to the medium property perturbation of the scatterers, {tilde over (p)}d,F in Eq. 9 should be approximate equal to {tilde over (p)}d in Eq. 7.


The Hessian times vector operation can be approximated as



















2


E






K
b



(
r
)








K
b



(

r


)








K
~



(

r


)






V





=











p
~

d






p
b






K
b



(
r
)







t





S
s






S
g
























p
~


d
,
F







p
b






K
b



(
r
)







t





S
s







S
g


.












(
11
)








The equation above shows that one can compute the Hessian times vector by (1) creating a new subsurface model Kb+ε{tilde over (K)}, (2) computing the received field {tilde over (p)}F in the new subsurface model, (3) computing the gradient in the background model Kb by treating {tilde over (p)}F to be a field measurement, and (4) scaling the gradient by 1/ε. Since these operations uses only forward wave propagation and gradient computation, this method eliminates the need to implement the Hessian times vector operators, i.e. eliminates the need to implement a computer program that computes the Hessian times vector. Instead, one can reuse already existing forward propagation and gradient computation routines to obtain the Hessian times vector. Of course, this advantage disappears if one has already implemented the Hessian times vector operation. Furthermore, the operation disclosed herein requires roughly 3.5 wave propagations compared to 4 wave propagations in Eq. 6, and so is computationally more efficient.


One can further improve the convergence to minima by increasing the value of ε in Eq. 10. When the value of ε is increased, the scattered field {tilde over (p)}d,F in Eq. 9 departs from the Born scattered field, and it includes nonlinear effects such as multiple scattering, travel time change, and nonlinear amplitude scaling with respect to {tilde over (K)}. One special case of a large ε value is when ε=1, and {tilde over (K)}=Kd. In this case, the wave equation 10 is the wave equation for the true subsurface medium, and so {tilde over (p)}F=p. The Hessian times vector in Eq. 11 is then exactly equal to the gradient, which is never achieved in Eq. 6 even when {tilde over (K)}=Kd due to the neglected higher order terms in Eq. 6.


For practical purposes, we may define ε to be










ɛ
=

α







K
b



(
r
)




max






K
~



(
r
)




max




,




(
12
)








where ∥Kb(r)∥max and ∥{tilde over (K)}(r)∥max are the maximum absolute values of Kb and {tilde over (K)} in space, respectively. The parameter α then represents approximate fractional change of ò{tilde over (K)}(r) in Eq. 10 with respect to Kb(r). Thus, α represents the ratio of the magnitude of the vector to be added to the model to the magnitude of the model vector, where the model's medium parameters are the components of the model vector in model space. One can then choose the value of α to control the behavior of the Hessian times vector in Eq. 11. When the value of α is fairly small, on the order of 0.01, the Hessian operator in Eq. 11 mimics the behavior of Gauss-Newton Hessian in Eq. 5. When the value of α is relatively large and reaches on the order of 0.1, on the other hand, the Hessain operator in Eq. 11 starts to include the effect of nonlinearity and multiple scattering, and so behaves similar to that in Eq. 4.


While the equation above was derived specifically for the bulk modulus K, this method can be applied for the computation of the Hessian times vector of any general elastic parameters such as density ρ or any of the 21 elastic stiffness constants Cij. Let mb(r) and {tilde over (m)}(r) be the background medium properties and the multiplication vector of any of these elastic parameters. Then the Hessian times vector of any of these properties can be computed as



















2


E






m
b



(
r
)








m
b



(

r


)








m
~



(

r


)






V





=








[











p
d






m
b



(
r
)









p
d






m
b



(

r


)







t





S
s






S
g






]









m
~



(

r


)






V













=
















p
d






m
b



(
r
)




[







p
d






m
b



(
r
)







m
~



(

r


)






V





]











t





S
s






S
g












=



-









p
~

d






p
d






m
b



(
r
)







t





S
s






S
g














=











p
~

d






p
b






m
b



(
r
)







t





S
s






S
g







,







(
13
)








where {tilde over (p)}d now can be computed using the same method as that in Eqs. 9 and 10. Note this derivation is generally applicable to any type of objective functions such as L2 objective function given in Eq. 1 or cross-correlation objective function in Ref 8. Note also that the method presented here is a special case of PDE (Partial Differential Equation) constrained optimization problems, and so the method is in general applicable to any PDE constrained optimization problems where Hessian times vector needs to be computed. For example, this method can also be applied to problems relating to electro-magnetic wave propagation.


Below is the procedure of the present invention as applied to, for example, determining the model update in a method for physical property parameter estimation by data inversion using the gradient of an objective function, with the steps as shown in the flowchart of FIG. 2:

  • Step 21 Form a multi-component vector whose components are related to the values of a selected physical property at discrete cells in a model of the subsurface according to a current subsurface model 20 of that property (for the present example, the vector would typically be the gradient of the objective function, but in a general application of the inventive method, this would be whatever vector is later to be multiplied by the Hessian);
  • Step 22 Scale the vector by a small scalar constant (ε), i.e. by multiplying by ε;
  • Step 23 Add the scaled vector to the current subsurface model;
  • Step 24 Forward propagate the wavefields in the new model to compute a synthetic seismic dataset;
  • Step 25 Compute the gradient of the objective function measuring misfit (typically a selected norm of the data residual) between forward modeled data using the current subsurface model and “measured” data, where the synthetic seismic dataset from step 24 is treated as the measured data for purposes of this step;
  • Step 26 Divide the gradient from step 25 by the scalar constant ε from step 22,
  • Step 27 Use this scaled gradient as an estimate of the Hessian times vector in optimization routines that require evaluation of that Hessian times vector.


Then, steps 21 to 27 may be repeated iteratively, using a Newton-CG algorithm for example, to obtain the inverse of the Hessian times the gradient of the objective function, which gives the model (medium parameter) update. Here, the objective function measures misfit between the actual measured field data and the data modeled from the current model.


The sum in step 23 is performed, cell-by-cell, in the discrete subsurface property model. For example, for application to model parameter estimation by geophysical data inversion, the “vector” will typically start out being the multi-dimensional gradient of the objective function with respect to each model parameter. Thus, the gradient of the objective function is a vector with as many components as there are cells in the model, times the number of subsurface parameters, such as bulk modulus or density. For each cell, the corresponding component of the vector, after being scaled, is added to the model value, sometimes called parameter, for that cell.


The method of steps 21-27 may be used in the iterative solving of any partial differential equation involving the Hessian times vector operation.


EXAMPLE

For an illustrative example, we use the Marmousi II model [4] shown in FIG. 3A. This is the “true” model that was used to generate the synthetic data that was assumed to be the measured data for purposes of this example. The initial model for the full wavefield inversion is given in FIG. 3B. The inversion was performed by the encoded-simultaneous-source method described in Ref [2], which discusses the Marmousi II model and includes the two drawings reproduced here. The inversion result using the Newton's method as a function of computation time is shown in FIG. 1. The solid line is the result using Gauss-Newton Hessian, the dashed line is the result using the present invention where α=0.01 in equation (12), and the dotted line is the result using the present invention where α=0.1. In other words, the solid line uses the Gauss-Newton Hessian times vector in equation (8), with the inverse evaluated by the C-G method without benefit of the present invention, whereas the two broken lines use the Hessian times vector in equation (11) with the inverse evaluated by the C-G method with benefit of the present invention Convergence of full waveform inversion is shown as a function of computation time. Both computation time and the model fit are normalized to 1. Model fit is defined to be an RMS velocity error between the inverted and the true model, as defined in Ref [2]. The dots in the lines mark the time for 1 iteration of the Newton method.


One can see from FIG. 1 that the present invention yields roughly 40% speed up in the convergence compared to the result using the Gauss-Newton Hessian when α=0.01. One can further improve the convergence by increasing the value of α to 0.1 so that more nonlinear effects are included in the Hessian times vector approximation. However, if the value of alpha were to be further increased, the new model in Step 23 above might be non-physical, with the result that one may not even be able compute the forward wavefield in Step 24. For example, the velocity of the new summation model might become negative.


The foregoing application is directed to particular embodiments of the present invention for the purpose of illustrating it. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the art, that many modifications and variations to the embodiments described herein are possible. All such modifications and variations are intended to be within the scope of the present invention, as defined in the appended claims.


REFERENCES



  • [1] A. Baumstein, J. E. Anderson, D. Hinkley, and J. R. Krebs, “Scaling of the objective function gradient for full wavefield inversion,” 79th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstract, (2009).

  • [2] J. R. Krebs, J. E. Anderson, D. Hinkley, R. Neelamani, S. Lee, A. Baumstein, and M.-D. Lacasse, “Fast full-wavefield seismic inversion using encoded sources,” Geophysics, 74:WCC177-188, (2009).

  • [3] S. Lee, J. R. Krebs, J. E. Anderson, A. Baumstein, and D. Hinkley, “Methods for subsurface parameter estimation in full wavefield inversion and reverse-time migration,” 80th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstract, (2010).

  • [4] G. S. Martin, R. Wiley, K. J. Marfurt, “Marmousi2: An elastic upgrade for Marmousi,” The Leading Edge 25, 156-166 (2006).

  • [5] J. Nocedal and S. J. Wright, Numerical Optimization, Springer, Chap. 7.1, New York, 2nd edition (2006).

  • [6] R. E. Plessix, “A review of the adjoin-state method for computing the gradient of a functional with geophysical applications,” Geophys. J. Int., 167:495-503, (2006).

  • [7] R. G. Pratt, C. Shin, and G. J. Hicks, “Gauss-Newton and full Newton methods in frequency-space seismic waveform inversion,” Geophys. J. Int., 133:341-362, (1998).

  • [8] P. Routh, J. Krebs, S. Lazaratos, A. Baumstein, S. Lee, Y. H. Cha, I. Chikichev, N. Downey, D. Hinkley, and J. Anderson, “Encoded simultaneous source full-wavefield inversion for spectrally shaped marine streamer data,” 81st SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstract, (2011).

  • [9] A. Tarantola, “Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation,” Geophysics, 49:1259-1266, (1984).

  • [10] A. Tarantola, “A strategy for nonlinear elastic inversion of seismic reflection data,” Geophysics, 51:1893-1903, (1986).

  • [11] A. Tarantola, “Inverse Problem Theory and Methods for Model Parameter Estimation,” SIAM, (2005).


Claims
  • 1. A method for determining a discrete physical properties model of a subsurface region, referred to herein as the model or the subsurface model, by iteratively inverting measured geophysical data acquired from the subsurface region, comprising: approximating a Hessian matrix of an objective function, then times a vector, called Hessian times vector, using a computer, with a single forward-wave simulated propagation and a single computation of gradient of the objective function, in a modified subsurface model, thereby requiring only three forward-wave or reverse-wave propagations;wherein said approximation is based on an approximate equation for a Born scattered pressure field, {tilde over (p)}d,F, where the Hessian times vector is approximated by a gradient computation using {tilde over (p)}d,F as an artificial residual;then computing a direction in model parameter space for an update to a current model by multiplying inverse of the Hessian matrix times a gradient of the objective function, wherein the inverse of the Hessian matrix is computed iteratively using a conjugate gradient method in which said approximate Hessian times vector is used to evaluate the Hessian matrix times a model perturbation vector;performing a line search to determine magnitude of the model update using said computed direction; andadding the model update to the current model to form an updated model, and using the updated model for geophysical prospecting.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the modified subsurface model is a linear combination of a current subsurface model and the vector.
  • 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the linear combination =the current subsurface model +{(a scalar constant)×(the vector)}, wherein 0<the scalar constant≦1.
  • 4. The method of claim 3, wherein the scalar constant is chosen according to whether the Hessian matrix will be computed exactly, which means taking multiple scattering into account, or will be approximated by the Gauss-Newton Hessian matrix.
  • 5. The method of claim 4, wherein if the Gauss-Newton approximation is to be used, the scalar constant is chosen such that {(a scalar constant)×(the vector)} is approximately 1% in magnitude of the current subsurface model; but if the Hessian matrix is to be computed exactly, then the scalar constant is chosen so that the {(a scalar constant)×(the vector)} is approximately 10% in magnitude of the current subsurface model.
  • 6. The method of claim 3, wherein the vector in a first iteration of the method is gradient of the objective function with respect to parameters of the model, wherein the objective function measures misfit between the measured geophysical data and corresponding synthetic geophysical data simulated using the model, said misfit being a selected norm of a data residual, wherein the data residual is the difference between the measured geophysical data and corresponding synthetic geophysical data simulated using the model; provided that for said single computation of gradient of the objective function, the measured geophysical data in the data residual is replaced by synthetic data simulated using the modified subsurface model, and the data residual is divided by the scalar constant.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, where the measured geophysical data being inverted is a full wavefield of seismic data.
  • 8. The method of claim 7, where the physical properties model is a model of at least one of a group consisting of 21 elastic constants including bulk modulus; density; or any combination of two or more of them.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein {tilde over (p)}d,F is approximated as
  • 10. The method of claim 9, wherein said approximation further includes taking {tilde over (p)}d,F to be equal to {tilde over (p)}d, where {tilde over (p)}d is difference between measured pressure and the modeled pressure pb.
  • 11. A method for determining a discrete physical properties model of a subsurface region by iteratively inverting measured geophysical data acquired from the subsurface region, comprising using a Hessian matrix operating on an objective function, then times a vector, called Hessian times vector, to determine an update for an initial model, wherein the Hessian times vector is approximated, using a computer, with a single forward wave simulated propagation and a single gradient of the objective function computation in a modified subsurface model thereby requiring only three forward-wave or reverse-wave propagations, comprising: forming a scaled vector by multiplying the vector by a number ε, where 0<ε≦1, and adding the scaled vector to the initial model;simulating a first synthetic data set using the model with the scaled vector added to it;forming the objective function to measure misfit between a second synthetic data set, simulated using the initial model, and said first synthetic data set;computing a gradient of the formed objective function with respect to the physical property parameters, dividing the gradient by ε, and using that as an estimate of the Hessian times vector;computing a direction in model parameter space for an update to the initial model by multiplying inverse of the Hessian matrix times a gradient of the objective function, wherein the inverse of the Hessian matrix is computed iteratively using a conjugate gradient method in which said estimate of the Hessian times vector is used to evaluate the Hessian matrix times a model perturbation vector;performing a line search to determine magnitude of the model update using said computed direction; andadding the model update to the initial model to form an updated model, and using the updated model for geophysical prospecting.
  • 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the vector in a first iteration of the iterative inversion is gradient in model space of the objective function, wherein the objective function measures misfit between the measured geophysical data and corresponding model-simulated geophysical data.
  • 13. A computer program product, comprising a non-transitory computer usable medium having a computer readable program code embodied therein, said computer readable program code adapted to be executed to implement a method for determining a discrete physical properties model of a subsurface region, referred to herein as the model or the subsurface model, by iteratively inverting measured geophysical data acquired from the subsurface region, said method comprising: using a Hessian matrix of an objective function, then times a vector, called Hessian times vector, to determine an update for the model, wherein the Hessian times vector is approximated with a single forward-wave simulated propagation and a single computation of gradient of the objective function in a modified subsurface model, thereby requiring only three forward-wave or reverse-wave propagations;wherein said approximation is based on an approximate equation for a Born scattered pressure field {tilde over (p)}d,F, where the Hessian times vector is approximated by a gradient computation using {tilde over (p)}d,F as an artificial residual;then computing a direction in model parameter space for an update to a current model by multiplying inverse of the Hessian matrix times a gradient of the objective function, wherein the inverse of the Hessian matrix is computed iteratively using a conjugate gradient method in which said approximate Hessian times vector is used to evaluate the Hessian matrix times a model perturbation vector;performing a line search to determine magnitude of the model update using said computed direction; andadding the model update to the current model to form an updated model.
  • 14. The method of claim 13, wherein the vector in a first iteration of the iterative inversion is gradient in model space of the objective function, wherein the objective function measures misfit between the measured geophysical data and corresponding model-simulated geophysical data.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application 61/564,669, filed Nov. 29, 2011 entitled METHODS FOR APPROXIMATING HESSIAN TIMES VECTOR OPERATION IN FULL WAVEFIELD INVERSION, the entirety of which is incorporated by reference herein.

US Referenced Citations (205)
Number Name Date Kind
3812457 Weller May 1974 A
3864667 Bahjat Feb 1975 A
4159463 Silverman Jun 1979 A
4168485 Payton et al. Sep 1979 A
4545039 Savit Oct 1985 A
4562540 Devaney Dec 1985 A
4575830 Ingram et al. Mar 1986 A
4594662 Devaney Jun 1986 A
4636956 Vannier et al. Jan 1987 A
4675851 Savit et al. Jun 1987 A
4686654 Savit Aug 1987 A
4707812 Martinez Nov 1987 A
4715020 Landrum, Jr. Dec 1987 A
4766574 Whitmore et al. Aug 1988 A
4780856 Becquey Oct 1988 A
4823326 Ward Apr 1989 A
4916616 Freedman et al. Apr 1990 A
4924390 Parsons et al. May 1990 A
4953657 Edington Sep 1990 A
4969129 Currie Nov 1990 A
4982374 Edington et al. Jan 1991 A
5260911 Mason et al. Nov 1993 A
5469062 Meyer, Jr. Nov 1995 A
5583825 Carrazzone et al. Dec 1996 A
5677893 de Hoop et al. Oct 1997 A
5715213 Allen Feb 1998 A
5717655 Beasley Feb 1998 A
5719821 Sallas et al. Feb 1998 A
5721710 Sallas et al. Feb 1998 A
5790473 Allen Aug 1998 A
5798982 He et al. Aug 1998 A
5822269 Allen Oct 1998 A
5838634 Jones et al. Nov 1998 A
5852588 de Hoop et al. Dec 1998 A
5878372 Tabarovsky et al. Mar 1999 A
5920828 Norris et al. Jul 1999 A
5924049 Beasley et al. Jul 1999 A
5999488 Smith Dec 1999 A
5999489 Lazaratos Dec 1999 A
6014342 Lazaratos Jan 2000 A
6021094 Ober et al. Feb 2000 A
6028818 Jeffryes Feb 2000 A
6058073 VerWest May 2000 A
6125330 Robertson et al. Sep 2000 A
6219621 Hornbostel Apr 2001 B1
6225803 Chen May 2001 B1
6311133 Lailly et al. Oct 2001 B1
6317695 Zhou et al. Nov 2001 B1
6327537 Ikelle Dec 2001 B1
6374201 Grizon et al. Apr 2002 B1
6381543 Guerillot et al. Apr 2002 B1
6388947 Washbourne et al. May 2002 B1
6480790 Calvert et al. Nov 2002 B1
6522973 Tonellot et al. Feb 2003 B1
6545944 de Kok Apr 2003 B2
6549854 Malinverno et al. Apr 2003 B1
6574564 Lailly et al. Jun 2003 B2
6593746 Stolarczyk Jul 2003 B2
6662147 Fournier et al. Dec 2003 B1
6665615 Van Riel et al. Dec 2003 B2
6687619 Moerig et al. Feb 2004 B2
6687659 Shen Feb 2004 B1
6704245 Becquey Mar 2004 B2
6714867 Meunier Mar 2004 B2
6735527 Levin May 2004 B1
6754590 Moldoveanu Jun 2004 B1
6766256 Jeffryes Jul 2004 B2
6826486 Malinverno Nov 2004 B1
6836448 Robertsson et al. Dec 2004 B2
6842701 Moerig et al. Jan 2005 B2
6859734 Bednar Feb 2005 B2
6865487 Charron Mar 2005 B2
6865488 Moerig et al. Mar 2005 B2
6876928 Van Riel et al. Apr 2005 B2
6882938 Vaage et al. Apr 2005 B2
6882958 Schmidt et al. Apr 2005 B2
6901333 Van Riel et al. May 2005 B2
6903999 Curtis et al. Jun 2005 B2
6927698 Stolarczyk Aug 2005 B2
6944546 Xiao et al. Sep 2005 B2
6947843 Fisher et al. Sep 2005 B2
6970397 Castagna et al. Nov 2005 B2
6977866 Huffman et al. Dec 2005 B2
6999880 Lee Feb 2006 B2
7027927 Routh et al. Apr 2006 B2
7046581 Calvert May 2006 B2
7050356 Jeffryes May 2006 B2
7069149 Goff et al. Jun 2006 B2
7072767 Routh et al. Jul 2006 B2
7092823 Lailly et al. Aug 2006 B2
7110900 Adler et al. Sep 2006 B2
7184367 Yin Feb 2007 B2
7216004 Kohn et al. May 2007 B2
7230879 Herkenhoff et al. Jun 2007 B2
7271747 Baraniuk et al. Sep 2007 B2
7330799 Lefebvre et al. Feb 2008 B2
7337069 Masson et al. Feb 2008 B2
7373251 Hamman et al. May 2008 B2
7373252 Sherrill et al. May 2008 B2
7376046 Jeffryes May 2008 B2
7376539 Lecomte May 2008 B2
7400978 Langlais et al. Jul 2008 B2
7436734 Krohn Oct 2008 B2
7480206 Hill Jan 2009 B2
7584056 Koren Sep 2009 B2
7599798 Beasley et al. Oct 2009 B2
7602670 Jeffryes Oct 2009 B2
7616523 Tabti et al. Nov 2009 B1
7620534 Pita et al. Nov 2009 B2
7646924 Donoho Jan 2010 B2
7672194 Jeffryes Mar 2010 B2
7672824 Dutta et al. Mar 2010 B2
7675815 Saenger et al. Mar 2010 B2
7679990 Herkenhoff et al. Mar 2010 B2
7715985 Van Manen et al. May 2010 B2
7715986 Nemeth et al. May 2010 B2
7725266 Sirgue et al. May 2010 B2
7791980 Robertsson et al. Sep 2010 B2
7835072 Izumi Nov 2010 B2
7840625 Candes et al. Nov 2010 B2
7940601 Ghosh May 2011 B2
8121823 Krebs et al. Feb 2012 B2
8437219 Chapman et al. May 2013 B2
8498845 Jing et al. Jul 2013 B2
8537638 Lee et al. Sep 2013 B2
8619498 Xu et al. Dec 2013 B2
8694299 Krebs et al. Apr 2014 B2
8756042 Tan et al. Jun 2014 B2
8768659 Vasudevan et al. Jul 2014 B2
20020099504 Cross et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020120429 Ortoleva Aug 2002 A1
20020183980 Guillaume Dec 2002 A1
20040199330 Routh et al. Oct 2004 A1
20050010383 Le Ravalec-Dupin et al. Jan 2005 A1
20060235666 Assa et al. Oct 2006 A1
20070036030 Baumel et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070038691 Candes et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070274155 Ikelle Nov 2007 A1
20080173104 German Jul 2008 A1
20080175101 Saenger et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080306692 Singer et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090067041 Krauklis et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090070042 Birchwood et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090083006 Mackie Mar 2009 A1
20090164186 Haase et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090164756 Dokken et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090187391 Wendt et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090248308 Luling Oct 2009 A1
20090254320 Lovatini et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090259406 Khadhraoui et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090259447 Langemyr et al. Oct 2009 A1
20100008184 Hegna et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100018718 Krebs et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100039894 Abma et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100054082 McGarry et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100088035 Etgen et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100103772 Eick et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100118651 Liu et al. May 2010 A1
20100142316 Keers et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100161233 Saenger et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100161234 Saenger et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100185422 Hoversten Jul 2010 A1
20100202250 Kitchenside et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100208554 Chiu et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100212909 Baumstein et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100265797 Robertsson et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100270026 Lazaratos et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100286919 Lee et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100299070 Abma Nov 2010 A1
20110000678 Krebs et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110016065 Chapelle et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110040926 Donderici et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110051553 Scott et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110090760 Rickett et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110103187 Albertin et al. May 2011 A1
20110131020 Meng Jun 2011 A1
20110134722 Virgilio et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110182141 Zhamikov et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110182144 Gray Jul 2011 A1
20110191032 Moore Aug 2011 A1
20110194379 Lee et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110222370 Downton et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110227577 Zhang et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110235464 Brittan et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110238390 Krebs et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110246140 Abubakar et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110267921 Mortel et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110267923 Shin Nov 2011 A1
20110276320 Krebs et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110288831 Tan et al. Nov 2011 A1
20120014215 Saenger et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120014216 Saenger et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120051176 Liu Mar 2012 A1
20120051179 Shin Mar 2012 A1
20120051180 Shin Mar 2012 A1
20120051182 Shin Mar 2012 A1
20120073824 Routh Mar 2012 A1
20120073825 Routh Mar 2012 A1
20120075954 Xu et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120082344 Donoho Apr 2012 A1
20120143506 Routh et al. Jun 2012 A1
20130138408 Lee et al. May 2013 A1
20130311149 Tang et al. Nov 2013 A1
20140301158 Zhang et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140355375 Zuberi et al. Dec 2014 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (13)
Number Date Country
1 094 338 Apr 2001 EP
1 746 443 Jan 2007 EP
2 390 712 Jan 2004 GB
2 391 665 Feb 2004 GB
WO 2006037815 Apr 2006 WO
WO 2007046711 Apr 2007 WO
WO 2008042081 Apr 2008 WO
WO 2008123920 Oct 2008 WO
WO 2009067041 May 2009 WO
WO 2009117174 Sep 2009 WO
WO 2011040926 Apr 2011 WO
WO 2011091216 Jul 2011 WO
WO 2011093945 Aug 2011 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (128)
Entry
U.S. Appl. No. 13/224,005, filed Sep. 1, 2011, Routh et al.
Griewank, A. (2000), Evaluating Derivatives: Principles and Techniques of Algorithmic Differentiation, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 49 pgs.
Griewank, A. et al. (2000), “Algorithm 799: An implementation of checkpointing for the reverse or adjoint mode of computational differentiation,” 26 ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, pp. 19-45.
Griewank, A. et al. (1996), “Algorithm 755: A package for the automatic differentiation of algorithms written in C/C++,” ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 22(2), pp. 131-167.
Haber, E. et al. (2010), “An effective method for parameter estimation with PDE constraints with multiple right hand sides,” Preprint—UBC http://www.math.ubc.ca/˜haber/pubs/PdeOptStochV5.pdf.
Helbig, K. (1994), “Foundations of Anisotropy for Exploration Seismics,” Chapter 5, pp. 185-194.
Herrmann, F.J. (2010), “Randomized dimensionality reduction for full-waveform inversion,” EAGE abstract G001, EAGE Barcelona meeting, 5 pgs.
Holschneider, J. et al. (2005), “Characterization of dispersive surface waves using continuous wavelet transforms,” Geophys. J. Int. 163, pp. 463-478.
Hu, L.Z. et al. (1987), “Wave-field transformations of vertical seismic profiles,” Geophysics 52, pp. 307-321.
Huang, Y. et al. (2012), “Multisource least-squares migration of marine streamer and land data with frequency-division encoding,” Geophysical Prospecting 60, pp. 663-680.
Igel, H. et al. (1996), “Waveform inversion of marine reflection seismograms for P impedance and Poisson's ratio,” Geophys. J. Int. 124, pp. 363-371.
Ikelle, L.T. (2007), “Coding and decoding: Seismic data modeling, acquisition, and processing,” 77th Annual Int'l. Meeting, SEG Expanded Abstracts, pp. 66-70.
Jackson, D.R. et al. (1991), “Phase conjugation in underwater acoustics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 89(1), pp. 171-181.
Jing, X. et al. (2000), “Encoding multiple shot gathers in prestack migration,” SEG International Exposition and 70th Annual Meeting Expanded Abstracts, pp. 786-789.
Kennett, B.L.N. (1991), “The removal of free surface interactions from three-component seismograms”, Geophys. J. Int. 104, pp. 153-163.
Krebs, J.R. (2008), “Fast Full-wavefield seismic inversion using encoded sources,” Geophysics 74(6), pp. WCC177-WCC188.
Krohn, C.E. (1984), “Geophone ground coupling,” Geophysics 49(6), pp. 722-731.
Kroode, F.T. et al. (2009), “Wave Equation Based Model Building and Imaging in Complex Settings,” OTC 20215, 2009 Offshore Technology Conf., Houston, TX, May 4-7, 2009, 8 pgs.
Kulesh, M. et al. (2008), “Modeling of Wave Dispersion Using Continuous Wavelet Transforms II: Wavelet-based Frequency-velocity Analysis,” Pure Applied Geophysics 165, pp. 255-270.
Lancaster, S. et al. (2000), “Fast-track ‘colored’ inversion,” 70th SEG Ann. Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1572-1575.
Lazaratos, S. et al. (2009), “Inversion of Pre-migration Spectral Shaping,” 2009 SEG Houston Int'l. Expo. & Ann. Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2383-2387.
Lazaratos, S. (2006), “Spectral Shaping Inversion for Elastic and Rock Property Estimation,” Research Disclosure, Issue 511, pp. 1453-1459.
Lazaratos, S. et al. (2011), “Improving the convergence rate of full wavefield inversion using spectral shaping,” SEG Expanded Abstracts 30, pp. 2428-2432.
Lecomte, I. (2008), “Resolution and illumination analyses in PSDM: A ray-based approach,” The Leading Edge, pp. 650-663.
Lee, S. et al. (2010), “Subsurface parameter estimation in full wavefield inversion and reverse time migration,” SEG Denver 2010 Annual Meeting, pp. 1065-1069.
Levanon, N. (1988), “Radar Principles,” Chpt. 1, John Whiley & Sons, New York, pp. 1-18.
Liao, Q. et al. (1995), “2.5D full-wavefield viscoacoustic inversion,” Geophysical Prospecting 43, pp. 1043-1059.
Liu, F. et al. (2007), “Reverse-time migration using one-way wavefield imaging condition,” SEG Expanded Abstracts 26, pp. 2170-2174.
Liu, F. et al. (2011), “An effective imaging condition for reverse-time migration using wavefield decomposition,” Geophysics 76, pp. S29-S39.
Maharramov, M. et al. (2007) , “Localized image-difference wave-equation tomography,” SEG Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 3009-3013.
Malmedy, V. et al. (2009), “Approximating Hessians in unconstrained optimization arising from discretized problems,” Computational Optimization and Applications, pp. 1-16.
Marcinkovich, C. et al. (2003), “On the implementation of perfectly matched layers in a three-dimensional fourth-order velocity-stress finite difference scheme,” J. of Geophysical Research 108(B5), 2276.
Martin, G.S. et al. (2006), “Marmousi2: An elastic upgrade for Marmousi,” The Leading Edge, pp. 156-166.
Meier, M.A. et al. (2009), “Converted wave resolution,” Geophysics, 74(2):doi:10.1190/1.3074303, pp. Q1-Q16.
Moghaddam, P.P. et al. (2010), “Randomized full-waveform inversion: a dimenstionality-reduction approach,” 80th SEG Ann. Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 977-982.
Mora, P. (1987), “Nonlinear two-dimensional elastic inversion of multi-offset seismic data,” Geophysics 52, pp. 1211-1228.
Tang, Y. et al. (2010), “Preconditioning full waveform inversion with phase-encoded Hessian,” SEG Expanded Abstracts 29, pp. 1034-1037.
Tarantola, A. (1984), “Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation,” Geophysics 49, pp. 1259-1266.
Tarantola, A. (1986), “A strategy for nonlinear elastic inversion of seismic reflection data,” Geophysics 51(10), pp. 1893-1903.
Tarantola, A. (1988), “Theoretical background for the inversion of seismic waveforms, including elasticity and attenuation,” Pure and Applied Geophysics 128, pp. 365-399.
Tarantola, A. (2005), “Inverse Problem Theory and Methods for Model Parameter Estimation,” SIAM, pp. 79.
Trantham, E.C. (1994), “Controlled-phase acquisition and processing,” SEG Expanded Abstracts 13, pp. 890-894.
Tsvankin, I. (2001), “Seismic Signatures and Analysis of Reflection Data in Anisotropic Media,” Elsevier Science, p. 8.
van Manen, D.J. (2005), “Making wave by time reversal,” SEG International Exposition and 75th Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1763-1766.
van Groenestijn, G.J.A. et al. (2009), “Estimating primaries by sparse inversion and application to near-offset reconstruction,” Geophyhsics 74(3), pp. A23-A28.
Verschuur, D.J. (2009), Target-oriented, least-squares imaging of blended data, 79th Annual Int'l. Meeting, SEG Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2889-2893.
Verschuur, D.J. et al. (1992), “Adaptive surface-related multiple elimination,” Geophysics 57(9), pp. 1166-1177.
Verschuur, D.J. (1989), “Wavelet Estimation by Prestack Multiple Elimination,” SEG Expanded Abstracts 8, pp. 1129-1132.
Vigh, D. et al. (2008), “3D prestack plane-wave, full-waveform inversion,” Geophysics 73(5), pp. VE135-VE144.
Wang, Y. (2007), “Multiple prediction through inversion: Theoretical advancements and real data application,” Geophysics 72(2), pp. V33-V39.
Wang, K. et al. (2009), “Simultaneous full-waveform inversion for source wavelet and earth model,” SEG Int'l. Expo. & Ann. Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2537-2541.
Weglein, A.B. (2003), “Inverse scattering series and seismic exploration,” Inverse Problems 19, pp. R27-R83.
Wu R-S. et al. (2006), “Directional illumination analysis using beamlet decomposition and propagation,” Geophysics 71(4), pp. S147-S159.
Xia, J. et al. (2004), “Utilization of high-frequency Rayleigh waves in near-surface geophysics,” The Leading Edge, pp. 753-759.
Xie, X. et al. (2002), “Extracting angle domain information from migrated wavefield,” SEG Expanded Abstracts21, pp. 1360-1363.
Xie, X.-B. et al. (2006), “Wave-equation-based seismic illumination analysis,” Geophysics 71(5), pp. S169-S177.
Yoon, K. et al. (2004), “Challenges in reverse-time migration,” SEG Expanded Abstracts 23, pp. 1057-1060.
Young, J. et al. (2011), “An application of random projection to parameter estimation in partial differential equations,” SIAM, 20 pgs.
Zhang, Y. (2005), “Delayed-shot 3D depth migration,” Geophysics 70, pp. E21-E28.
Ziolkowski, A. (1991), “Why don't we measure seismic signatures?,” Geophysics 56(2), pp. 190-201.
Mora, P. (1987), “Elastic Wavefield Inversion,” PhD Thesis, Stanford University, pp. 22-25.
Mora, P. (1989), “Inversion=migration+tomography,” Geophysics 64, pp. 888-901.
Nazarian, S. et al. (1983), “Use of spectral analysis of surface waves method for determination of moduli and thickness of pavement systems,” Transport Res. Record 930, pp. 38-45.
Neelamani, R., (2008), “Simultaneous sourcing without compromise,” 70th Annual Int'l. Conf. and Exh., EAGE, 5 pgs.
Neelamani, R. (2009), “Efficient seismic forward modeling using simultaneous sources and sparsity,” SEG Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2107-2111.
Nocedal, J. et al. (2006), “Numerical Optimization, Chapt. 7—Large-Scale Unconstrained Optimization,” Springer, New York, 2nd Edition, pp. 165-176.
Ostmo, S. et al. (2002), “Finite-difference iterative migration by linearized waveform inversion in the frequency domain,” SEG Int'l. Expo. & 72nd Ann. Meeting, 4 pgs.
Plessix, R.E. et al. (2004), “Frequency-domain finite-difference amplitude preserving migration,” Geophys. J. Int. 157, pp. 975-987.
Park, C.B. et al. (1999), “Multichannel analysis of surface waves,” Geophysics 64(3), pp. 800-808.
Park, C.B. et al. (2007), “Multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW)—active and passive methods,” The Leading Edge, pp. 60-64.
Pica, A. et al. (2005), “3D Surface-Related Multiple Modeling, Principles and Results,” 2005 SEG Ann. Meeting, SEG Expanded Abstracts 24, pp. 2080-2083.
Porter, R.P. (1989), “Generalized holography with application to inverse scattering and inverse source problems,” In E. Wolf, editor, Progress in Optics XXVII, Elsevier, pp. 317-397.
Pratt, R.G. et al. (1998), “Gauss-Newton and full Newton methods in frequency-space seismic waveform inversion,” Geophys. J Int. 133, pp. 341-362.
Pratt, R.G. (1999), “Seismic waveform inversion in the frequency domain, Part 1: Theory and verification in a physical scale model,” Geophysics 64, pp. 888-901.
Rawlinson, N. et al. (2008), “A dynamic objective function technique for generating multiple solution models in seismic tomography,” Geophys. J. Int. 178, pp. 295-308.
Rayleigh, J.W.S. (1899), “On the transmission of light through an atmosphere containing small particles in suspension, and on the origin of the blue of the sky,” Phil. Mag. 47, pp. 375-384.
Romero, L.A. et al. (2000), Phase encoding of shot records in prestack migration, Geophysics 65, pp. 426-436.
Ryden, N. et al. (2006), “Fast simulated annealing inversion of surface waves on pavement using phase-velocity spectra,” Geophysics 71(4), pp. R49-R58.
Routh, P. et al. (2011), “Encoded Simultaneous Source Full-Wavefield Inversion for Spectrally-Shaped Marine Streamer Data,” SEG San Antonio 2011 Ann. Meeting, pp. 2433-2438.
Schuster, G.T. et al. (2010), “Theory of Multisource Crosstalk Reduction by Phase-Encoded Statics,” SEG Denver 2010 Ann. Meeting, pp. 3110-3114.
Sheen, D-H. et al. (2006), “Time domain Gauss-Newton seismic waveform inversion in elastic media,” Geophysics J. Int. 167, pp. 1373-1384.
Shen, P. et al. (2003), “Differential semblance velocity analysis by wave-equation migration,” 73rd Ann. Meeting of Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 4 pgs.
Sheng, J. et al. (2006), “Early arrival waveform tomography on near-surface refraction data,” Geophysics 71, pp. U47-U57.
Sheriff, R.E.et al. (1982), “Exploration Seismology”, pp. 134-135.
Shih, R-C. et al. (1996), “Iterative pre-stack depth migration with velocity analysis,” Terrestrial, Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences 7(2), pp. 149-158.
Simard, P.Y. et al. (1990), “Vector Field Restoration by the Method of Convex Projections,” Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing 52, pp. 360-385.
Shin, C. et al. (2001), “Waveform inversion using a logarithmic wavefield,” Geophysics 49, pp. 592-606.
Sirgue, L. (2004), “Efficient waveform inversion and imaging: A strategy for selecting temporal frequencies,” Geophysics 69, pp. 231-248.
Spitz, S. (2008), “Simultaneous source separation: a prediction-subtraction approach,” 78th Annual Int'l. Meeting, SEG Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2811-2815.
Stefani, J. (2007), “Acquisition using simultaneous sources,” 69th Annual Conf. and Exh., EAGE Extended Abstracts, 5 pgs.
Symes, W.W. (2007), “Reverse time migration with optimal checkpointing,” Geophysics 72(5), pp. P.SM213-SM221.
Tang, Y. (2008), “Wave-equation Hessian by phase encoding,” SEG Expanded Abstracts 27, pp. 2201-2205.
Tang, Y. (2009), “Target-oriented wave-equation least-squares migration/inversion with phase-encoded Hessian,” Geophysics 74, pp. WCA95-WCA107.
Abt, D.L. et al. (2010), “North American lithospheric discontinuity structured imaged by Ps And Sp receiver functions”, J. Geophys. Res., 24 pgs.
Akerberg, P., et al. (2008), “Simultaneous source separation by sparse radon transform,” 78th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2801-2805.
Aki, K. et al. (1980), “Quantitative Seismology: Theory and Methods Volume I—Chapter 7—Surface Waves in a Vertically Heterogenous Medium,” W.H. Freeman and Co., pp. 259-318.
Aki, K. et al. (1980), “Quantitative Seismology: Theory and Methods Volume I,” W.H. Freeman and Co., p. 173.
Anderson, J.E. et al. (2008), “Sources Near the Free-Surface Boundary: Pitfalls for Elastic Finite-Difference Seismic Simulation and Multi-Grid Waveform Inversion,” 70th EAGE Conf. & Exh., 4 pgs.
Baumstein, A. et al. 2009), “Scaling of the Objective Function Gradient for Full Wavefield Inversion,” SEG Houston 2009 Int'l. Expo and Annual Meeting, pp. 224-2247.
Beasley, C. (2008), “A new look at marine simultaneous sources,” The Leading Edge 27(7), pp. 914-917.
Beaty, K.S. et al. (2003), “Repeatability of multimode Rayleigh-wave dispersion studies,” Geophysics 68(3), pp. 782-790.
Beaty, K.S. et al. (2002). “Simulated annealing inversion of multimode Rayleigh wave dispersion waves for geological structure,” Geophys. J Int. 151, pp. 622-631.
Becquey, M. et al. (2002). “Pseudo-Random Coded Simultaneous Vibroseismics,” SEG Int'l. Exposition and 72th Annl. Mtg., 4 pgs.
Berkhout, A.J. (1987), “Applied Seismic Wave Theory,” Elsevier Science Publishers, p. 142.
Berkhout, A.J. (1992), “Areal shot record technology,” Journal of Seismic Exploration 1, pp. 251-264.
Berkhout, A.J. (2008), “Changing the mindset in seismic data acquisition,” The Leading Edge 27(7), pp. 924-938.
Ben-Hadj-Ali, H. et al. (2009), “Three-dimensional frequency-domain full waveform inversion with phase encoding” SEG Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2288-2292.
Beylkin, G. (1985), “Imaging of discontinuities in the inverse scattring problem by inversion of a causal generalized Radon transform,” J. Math. Phys. 26, pp. 99-108.
Bonomi, E. et al. (2006), “Wavefield Migration plus Monte Carlo Imaging of 3D Prestack Seismic Data,” Geophysical Prospecting 54, pp. 505-514.
Boonyasiriwat, C. et al, (2010), 3D Multisource Full-Waveform using Dynamic Random Phase Encoding, SEG Denver 2010 Annual Meeting, pp. 1044-1049.
Boonyasiriwat, C. et al, (2010), 3D Multisource Full-Waveform using Dynamic Random Phase Encoding, SEG Denver 2010 Annual Meeting, pp. 3120-3124.
Bunks, C., et al. (1995), “Multiscale seismic waveform inversion,” Geophysics 60, pp, 1457-1473.
Burstedde, G. et al. (2009), “Algorithmic strategies for full waveform inversion: 1D experiments,” Geophysics 74(6), pp. WCC17-WCC46.
Chavent, G. et al. (1999), “An optimal true-amplitude least-squares prestack depth-migration operator,” Geophysics 64(2), pp. 508-515.
Clapp, R.G. (2009), “Reverse time migration with random boundaries,” SEG International Exposition and Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2809-2813.
Dai, W. et al. (2010), “3D Multi-source Least-squares Reverse Time Migration,” SEG Denver 2010 Annual Meeting, pp. 3120-3124.
Delprat-Jannuad, F. et al. (2005), “A fundamental limitation for the reconstruction of impedance profiles from seismic data,” Geophysics 70(1), pp. R1-R14.
Dickens, T.A. et al, (2011), RTM angle gathers using Poynting vectors, SEG Expanded Abstracts 30, pp. 3109-3113.
Dunkin, J.W. et al. (1973), “Effect of Normal Moveout on a Seismic Pluse,” Geophysics 38(4), pp. 635-642.
Dziewonski A. et al. (1981), “Preliminary Reference Earth Model”, Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 25(4), pp. 297-356.
Ernst, F.E. et al. (2000), “Tomography of dispersive media,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am 108(1), pp. 105-116.
Ernst, F.E. et al. (2002), “Removal of scattered guided waves from seismic data,” Geophysics 67(4), pp. 1240-1248.
Esmersoy, C. (1990), “Inversion of P and SV waves from multicomponent offset vertical seismic profiles”, Geophysics 55(1), pp, 39-50.
Fallat, M.R. et al. (1999), “Geoacoustic inversion via local, global, and hybrid algorithms,” Journal of Acoustical Society of America 105, pp. 3219-3230.
Fichtner, A. et al. (2006). “The adjoint method in seismology I. Theory,” Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 157, pp. 86-104.
Forbriger, T. (2003), “Inversion of shallow-seismic wavefields: I. Wavefield transformation,” Geophys. J. Int. 153, pp. 719-734.
Gibson, B. et al. (1984), “Predictive deconvolution and the zero-phase source,” Geophysics 49(4), pp. 379-397.
Griewank, A. (1992), “Achieving logarithmic growth of temporal and spatial complexity in reverse automatic differentiation,” 1 Optimization Methods and Software, pp. 35-54.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20130138408 A1 May 2013 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
61564669 Nov 2011 US