The present technology relates generally to seismic imaging. More particularly, but not by way of limitation, embodiments include tools and methods for designing and implementing seismic data acquisition using non-uniform optimal sampling principles.
Compressive sensing (CS) is an emerging field in signal processing that has applications in many different disciplines including seismic surveying. Traditionally, Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem established the sufficient condition for a sampling rate that permits a digital signal to capture all the information from a continuous-time signal of finite bandwidth. Compressive sensing provides a new paradigm of sampling which requires far fewer measurements compared to Nyquist-Shannon sampling criterion. Thus far, compressive sensing theory suggests that successful signal recovery can be best achieved through random measurements together with sparsity of the true signal. However, applying random sampling to seismic surveys raises many concerns and uncertainties.
The present technology relates generally to seismic imaging. More particularly, but not by way of limitation, embodiments of the presently disclosed technology include tools and methods for designing and implementing seismic data acquisition using non-uniform optimal sampling principles.
One method of acquiring seismic data includes determining a non-uniform optimal sampling design that includes a compressive sensing sampling grid; placing a plurality of source lines or receiver lines at a non-uniform optimal line interval; placing a plurality of receivers or nodes at a non-uniform optimal receiver interval; towing a plurality of streamers attached to a vessel, wherein the plurality of streamers is spaced apart at non-uniform optimal intervals based on the compressive sensing sampling grid; firing a plurality of shots from one or more seismic sources at non-uniform optimal shot intervals; and acquiring seismic data via the plurality of receivers or nodes.
In one example, a marine seismic streamer system for non-uniform optimal sampling data acquisition comprises a plurality of seismic streamers, wherein the separation between adjacent streamers is specified in a non-uniform optimal sampling design and is non-uniform. The separation between adjacent streamers may vary between 25 m and 200 m. The plurality of streamers may comprise from 6 to 50 streamers. Data may be recorded in continuous records with microsecond precision.
In another example, a marine seismic source system for non-uniform optimal sampling data acquisition comprises a source system capable of firing sources at a non-uniform shot spacing specified in a non-uniform optimal sampling design. The shot interval may range from 5 m to 100 m, and shot times may be recorded with microsecond precision.
A more complete understanding of the present invention and benefits thereof may be acquired by referring to the follow description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which:
Reference will now be made in detail to embodiments of the invention, one or more examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings. Each example is provided by way of explanation of the invention, not as a limitation of the invention. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various modifications and variations can be made in the present invention without departing from the scope or spirit of the invention. For instance, features illustrated or described as part of one embodiment can be used on another embodiment to yield a still further embodiment. Thus, it is intended that the present invention cover such modifications and variations that come within the scope of the invention.
In signal processing, compressive sensing (CS) asserts that the exact recovery of certain signals can be obtained from far fewer measurements than as required by Shannon's sampling criterion. Generally speaking, applicability of compressive sensing for imaging depends on sparsity of signals and incoherence of sampling waveforms.
The present invention provides systems and methods for acquiring seismic data with relatively few measurements by utilizing compressive sensing principles. These principles include, but are not limited to, non-uniform optimal sampling (NUOS) design, seismic data reconstruction of data acquired using NUOS design, and blended source acquisition with NUOS design. These principles have been applied to real-world seismic survey scenarios including marine and ocean bottom seismic (OBS) and land surveys to increase data bandwidth and resolution.
Non-Uniform Optimal Sampling Design
One of the goals of non-uniform optimal sampling design is to find an optimal sampling grid that favors seismic data reconstruction. Non-uniform optimal sampling design provides a mathematical framework for optimizing both source and receiver configuration designs. As a summary, the following mathematical description of non-uniform optimal sampling design is provided.
The forward model for seismic data reconstruction can be described as
b=Dx, b=RS*x, x=Su, (1)
where b represents acquired seismic data on an irregular observed grid and u represents reconstructed seismic data on a finer regular reconstructed grid. The operator R is a restriction/sampling operator, which maps data from the reconstructed grid to the observed grid. If S is a suitably chosen dictionary (possibly over-complete), x is a sparse representation of u which has a small cardinality.
Mutual coherence is a measure of incoherency between sparsity basis S and sampling operator R. A high-fidelity data reconstruction requires the mutual coherence to be as small as possible. Assuming D=RS* can be written in a matrix form and di represent different columns in D, the mutual coherence μ can be defined as,
This is equivalent to the absolute maximum off-diagonal element of the Gram matrix, G=D*D.
The relationship between mutual coherence and successful data reconstruction is appealing for analysis. Typically, for seismic applications, this type of analysis would be prohibitively expensive to compute. However, if S is allowed to be a Fourier transform, then the definition of mutual coherence in equation 2 can be simplified to
where {circumflex over (r)}l are Fourier coefficients of diag(R*R). This can be interpreted as finding the largest non-DC Fourier component of a given sampling grid, which can be carried out efficiently using the fast transform. Equation 3 can serve as a proxy for mutual coherence when S is some over-complete dictionary, such as curvelet and generalized windowed Fourier transform (GWT).
Given the estimate for mutual coherence in equation 3, the non-uniform optimal sampling design seeks a sampling grid which minimizes the mutual coherence as follows,
The optimization problem in equation 4 can be effectively solved by, for example randomized greedy algorithms such as GRASP (Feo and Resende, 1995). In practice, the non-uniform optimal sampling design can be applied to both source and receiver sides.
Seismic Data Reconstruction
Seismic data acquired from the non-uniform optimal sampling design can be reconstructed to a finer grid by solving an analysis-based basis pursuit denoising problem:
Here σ is some approximation of noise level in the acquired data b. While conventional interpolation techniques focus on filling in acquisition holes or increasing fold, CS-based data reconstruction improves sampling and extends unaliased bandwidth. Seismic data must be acquired in an irregular fashion in order to employ CS-based data reconstruction. Ideally with a proper non-uniform optimal sampling design, we can increase the unaliased bandwidth by a factor of 2-4 in a certain direction.
A production streamer survey is described in this example to illustrate design and reconstruction of marine seismic data in accordance with the present invention. A vessel equipped with a flip-flop source shooting every 18.75 m (on average) was used to acquire 3D streamer survey. Total of 12 streamers were towed behind the vessel. Each streamer was 5 km in length and 600 m in spread width.
Non-uniform optimal sampling source design was utilized to improve in-line sampling. Non-uniform optimal sampling cable design was utilized to improve cross-line sampling. Design considerations include, but are not limited to, minimum airgun cycle time, minimum cable separation, spread balancing, and the like.
Blended Source Acquisition
In conventional seismic data acquisition, sources are activated with adequate time intervals to ensure no interference between adjacent sources. The acquisition efficiency is limited by equipment and operational constraints. In particular, the source side sampling is often coarse and aliased if long record lengths are needed to obtain energy from far offsets.
In blended source acquisition, multiple sources may be activated within a single conventional shotpoint time window. Overlapping sources in time allows dramatic reduction in time associated with acquisition. It can also improve spatial sampling by increasing shot density. The tradeoff is that sources are blended together and generate so-called “blending noise”. The process of separating sources and forming interference-free records is commonly referred to as “deblending.”
For marine towed streamer and ocean bottom seismic (OBS), blended source acquisition can be carried out using multiple source vessels shooting simultaneously, or a single source vessel firing at a short time interval. Early marine simultaneous source experiment used an extra source vessel sailing behind the streamer vessel. Two sources were distance-separated and F-K filter was applied to separate shots. Later on, the concept of introducing small random time delays between each pair of sources was developed. Under this time-dithering scheme, interference between two sources became asynchronous incoherent noise and could be suppressed during conventional pre-stack time migration. Recent developments proposed the time-scheduling method for OBS which required little coordination between sources. Each source was assigned a set of random source initiation times and shots were taken following these times.
Both time-dithering and time-scheduling methods required extra manipulation of shot time and sometimes even vessel speed, which further complicates field operation and lead to potential human errors. Blended source acquisition can also be applied to NUOS. The NUOS scheme puts no constraints on shot time and makes minimal operational changes compared to conventional seismic acquisition. Both sampling density and deblending quality can benefit from a joint inversion of data acquired using a NUOS design.
For blended source acquisition, the recording system should be capable of recording continuously. Data should be delivered in a format of continuous records instead of conventional shot gathers. Each continuous record or time segment is expected to contain receives information and record start and end time stamps within at least microsecond precision. The source positioning data together with shot times can be stored in navigation files modified from one of the standard formats (e.g., SPS, P1/90, P1/11, etc). To better assist inversion-based deblending, time stamps from all shots should be recorded including production, non-production and infill shots, also within at least microsecond precision.
Routine onboard QC procedures can still be employed. Continuous records can be examined onboard by displaying the “time-segment gather” (i.e., data within a certain time window sorted by receivers). In this domain, blended shots are observed as coherent energy, regardless of uniform or non-uniform shooting patterns.
CS-Based Survey Design Principle
Separating blended sources can be better solved under a CS framework. Forward solutions have been proposed by exploiting the sparsity of seismic data, such as the generalized windowed Fourier. The non-uniform sampling scheme favors the inversion-based deblending by promoting the incoherence of blending noise. For seismic acquisition, a measure of incoherence (“mutual coherence”) is used to guide the non-uniform survey design. Referring back to equations 2-4, a proxy of mutual coherence can be effectively computed using the Fourier transform. Non-uniform optimal sampling minimizes mutual coherence to obtain an optimal survey design.
A field trial was conducted in the early stage of development.
For blended source acquisition, we rely on the non-uniform design in space, which by nature gives rise to irregularity in time, to generate the incoherent blending pattern needed for source separation.
The same inversion-based deblending method was applied on both datasets for a fair comparison. The method solves an analysis-based minimization using the nonmonotone ADM (Li et al., 2013b).
Although the systems and processes described herein have been described in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions, and alterations can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the following claims. Those skilled in the art may be able to study the preferred embodiments and identify other ways to practice the invention that are not exactly as described herein. It is the intent of the inventors that variations and equivalents of the invention are within the scope of the claims while the description, abstract and drawings are not to be used to limit the scope of the invention. The invention is specifically intended to be as broad as the claims below and their equivalents.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/073,907 filed Oct. 19, 2020, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/641,916, filed Jul. 5, 2017, which claims benefit of U.S. Patent Application Ser. No. 62/506,859 filed May 16, 2017. Each of these applications is incorporated by reference in its entirety herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2906363 | Clay, Jr. et al. | Sep 1959 | A |
3747055 | Greene, Jr. | Jul 1973 | A |
3747056 | Treybig et al. | Jul 1973 | A |
3840845 | Brown | Oct 1974 | A |
3877033 | Unz | Apr 1975 | A |
4330873 | Peterson | May 1982 | A |
4404664 | Zachariadis | Sep 1983 | A |
4404684 | Takada | Sep 1983 | A |
4509151 | Anderson | Apr 1985 | A |
4553221 | Hyatt | Nov 1985 | A |
4559605 | Norsworthy | Dec 1985 | A |
4596005 | Frasier | Jun 1986 | A |
4597066 | Frasier | Jun 1986 | A |
4721180 | Haughland et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
4852004 | Manin | Jul 1989 | A |
4958331 | Wardle | Sep 1990 | A |
4967400 | Woods | Oct 1990 | A |
4992990 | Langeland et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
5079703 | Mosher et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5092423 | Petermann | Mar 1992 | A |
5148406 | Brink et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5168472 | Lockwood | Dec 1992 | A |
5353223 | Norton et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5469404 | Barber et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5487052 | Cordsen | Jan 1996 | A |
5517463 | Hornbostel et al. | May 1996 | A |
5724306 | Barr | Mar 1998 | A |
5774417 | Corrigan et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5787051 | Goodway et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5835450 | Russell | Nov 1998 | A |
5963879 | Woodward et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5973995 | Walker et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6009042 | Workman et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6493636 | DeKok | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6509871 | Bevington | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6590831 | Bennett et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6691038 | Zajac | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6876599 | Combee | Apr 2005 | B1 |
7167412 | Tenghamn | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7234407 | Levine et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7359283 | Vaage et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7408836 | Muyzert et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7451717 | Levine et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7499374 | Ferber | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7499737 | Mizuta et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7515505 | Krohn et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7545703 | Lunde et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7646671 | Pan et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7835224 | Robertsson et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7993164 | Chatterjee et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8509027 | Strobbia et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8559270 | Abma | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8619497 | Sallas et al. | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8681581 | Moldoveanu et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8711654 | Moldoveanu et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8737184 | Yamazaki | May 2014 | B2 |
8897094 | Eick et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
9110177 | Opfer | Aug 2015 | B1 |
9234971 | Khan et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9291728 | Eick et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9529102 | Eick et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9632193 | Li et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9690003 | Sallas | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9823372 | Eick et al. | Nov 2017 | B2 |
9846248 | Eick et al. | Dec 2017 | B2 |
10267939 | Eick et al. | Apr 2019 | B2 |
10514474 | Eick et al. | Dec 2019 | B2 |
10605941 | Ll et al. | Mar 2020 | B2 |
10809402 | Li et al. | Oct 2020 | B2 |
10823867 | Eick et al. | Nov 2020 | B2 |
10989826 | Eick et al. | Apr 2021 | B2 |
11035968 | Li et al. | Jun 2021 | B2 |
20040172199 | Chavarria et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050088914 | Ren et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20060164916 | Krohn et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060239117 | Singh et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060268682 | Vasseur | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070013546 | McConnell et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070025182 | Robertsson | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070027656 | Baraniuk et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070276660 | Pinto | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080008037 | Welker | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080049551 | Muyzert et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080080309 | Elkington et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080089174 | Sollner et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080144434 | Hegna et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080151688 | Goujon | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080205193 | Krohn et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080225642 | Moore et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080285380 | Rouquette | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090000200 | Heuel et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090006053 | Carazzone et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090010101 | Lunde et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090067285 | Robertsson et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090073805 | Tulett et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090092006 | Teigen et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090122641 | Hillesund et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090141587 | Welker et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090213693 | Du et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090231956 | Schonewille | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090251992 | Van Borselen et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090262601 | Hillesund et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090279384 | Pavel | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090279386 | Monk | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090323472 | Howe | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100002536 | Brewer et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100103772 | Eick et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100128563 | Strobbia et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100195434 | Menger et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100208554 | Chiu et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100211321 | Ozdemir et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100265799 | Cevher et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100299070 | Abma | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110019502 | Eick et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110038227 | Kostov et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110128818 | Eick et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110156494 | Mashinsky | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110170796 | Qian et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110218737 | Gulati | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110286302 | Welker et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110305106 | Eick et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110305107 | Eick et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110305113 | Eick et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110307438 | Fernández Martínez | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110317517 | Borresen et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120002503 | Janiszewski et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120014212 | Eick et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120051181 | Eick et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120082004 | Boufounos | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120113745 | Eick et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120143604 | Singh | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120281499 | Eick et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120294116 | Kamata | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120300585 | Cao et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20130121109 | Baardman et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130135966 | Rommel et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130250720 | Monk et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130294194 | Pritchard | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140133271 | Sallas | May 2014 | A1 |
20140146638 | Renaud | May 2014 | A1 |
20140211590 | Sallas | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140278289 | Etgen | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140303898 | Poole | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140362663 | Jones et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150016218 | Welker et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150078128 | Eick et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150124560 | Li et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150272506 | Childs et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150348568 | Li et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160018547 | Eick et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160341839 | Kazinnik et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20170031045 | Poole et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170082761 | Li et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170090053 | Eick et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170108604 | Turquais et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20180067221 | Eick et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180335536 | Li et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20190129050 | Li et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
20190293813 | Li et al. | Sep 2019 | A1 |
20190310387 | Eick et al. | Oct 2019 | A1 |
20200104745 | Li | Apr 2020 | A1 |
20200225377 | Li et al. | Jul 2020 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
103954993 | Jul 2014 | CN |
2103959 | Sep 2009 | EP |
2592439 | May 2013 | EP |
WO-2005019865 | Mar 2005 | WO |
WO-2008073178 | Jun 2008 | WO |
WO-2009092025 | Jul 2009 | WO |
WO-2010149589 | Dec 2010 | WO |
WO-2011156491 | Dec 2011 | WO |
WO-2011156494 | Dec 2011 | WO |
WO-2012166737 | Dec 2012 | WO |
WO-2013105075 | Jul 2013 | WO |
WO-2014057440 | Apr 2014 | WO |
WO-2015066481 | May 2015 | WO |
WO-2016009270 | Jan 2016 | WO |
WO-2018085567 | May 2018 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Ala'i R., “Shallow Water Multiple Prediction and Attenuation, case study on data from the Arabian Gulf,” SEG International Exposition and 72nd Annual Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah, Oct. 6-11, 2002, 4 pages. |
Almendros J., et al., “Mapping the Sources of the Seismic Wave Field at Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii, Using Data Recorded on Multiple Seismic Antennas,” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, vol. 92(6), Aug. 2002, pp. 2333-2351. |
Amir V., et al., “Structural Evolution Of The Northern Bonaparte Basin, Northwest Shelf Australia,” Proceedings, Indonesian Petroleum Association, Thirty-Fourth Annual Convention & Exhibition, May 2010, 17 Pages. |
Baraniuk R.G., “Compressive Sensing,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, Jul. 2007, vol. 24(4), 9 pages. |
Barzilai J., et al., “Two Point Step Size Gradient Methods,” IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis, 1988, vol. 8, pp. 141-148. |
Bradley D.J., et al., “Memorandum Opinion and Order,” ConocoPhillips Company v. In-Depth Compressive Seismic, Civil Action No. H-18-0803, entered Apr. 26, 2019, 49 pages. |
Buia M., et al., “Shooting Seismic Surveys in Circles,” Oilfield Review, 2008, pp. 18-31. |
Candes E., et al., “Sparsity and Incoherence in Compressive Sampling,” Applied and Computational Mathematics, Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125 and Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA 90332, Nov. 2006, 20 pages. |
Carlson D., et al., “Increased Resolution and Penetration from a Towed Dual-Sensor Streamer”, First Break, Dec. 2007, vol. 25, pp. 71-77. |
Cordsen A., et al., “Planning Land 3D Seismic Surveys,” Geophysical Developments Series No. 9, Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG), Jan. 2000, 16 pages. |
Dragoset B., et al., “A Perspective on 3D Surface-Related Multiple Elimination”, Geophysics, Sep.-Oct. 2010, vol. 75, No. 5, pp. 75A245-75A261. |
Foster D.J., et al., “Suppression of Multiple Reflections Using the Radon Transform”, Mar. 1992, Geophysics, vol. 57, No. 3, pp. 386-395. |
Hennenfent G., et al., “Application of Stable Signal Recovery to Seismic Data Interpolation,” Gilles Hennenfent and Felix J. Herrmann Earth & Ocean Sciences Dept., University of British Columbia 2006, 4 pages. |
Hennenfent G., et al., “Simply Denoise: Wavefield Reconstruction via Jittered undersampling,” Geophysics, May-Jun. 2008, vol. 73(3), pp. V19-V28. |
Herrmann F.J., “Randomized Sampling and Sparsity: Getting More Information from Fewer Samples,” Geophysics, vol. 75(6), Nov.-Dec. 2010, pp. WB173-WB187. |
Hindriks K., et al., “Reconstruction of 3D Seismic Signals Irregularly Sampled Along Two Spatial Coordinates,” Geophysics, Jan.-Feb. 2000, vol. 65(1), pp. 253-263. |
Huang H., et al., “Joint SRME and Model-Based Water-Layer Demultiple for Ocean Bottom Node”, 2016 SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting, Retrieved from Internet: URL: https://www.cgg.com/sites/default/files/2020-11/cggv_0000026243.pdf, pp. 4508-4512. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US11/039640, dated Oct. 26, 2011, 8 Pages. |
International Search Report for Application No. PCT/US2016/053750, dated Dec. 27, 2016, 2 Pages. |
International Search Report for Application No. PCT/US2017/59760, dated Apr. 13, 2018, 2 pages. |
International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US2011/039635, dated Oct. 25, 2011, 2 pages. |
International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US2011/39640, dated Oct. 26, 2011, 3 pages. |
International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US2017/040796, dated Sep. 13, 2018, 2 pages. |
Jin H., et al., “MWD for Shallow Water Demultiple: A Hibernia Case Study,” Geo Convention 2012: Vision, 5 Pages. |
Kumar R., et al., “Source Separation for Simultaneous Ttowed-Streamer Marine Acquisition-A Compressed Sensing Approach,” Geophysics, vol. 80(6), Nov.-Dec. 2015, pp. WD73-WD88. |
Li C., et al., “A Multi-Stage Inversion Method for Simultaneous Source Deblending of Field Data,” SEG Annual Meeting 2014, Denver, Colorado, USA, Oct. 26, 2014, pp. 3610-3615. |
Li C., et al., “Aspects of Implementing Marine Blended Source Acquisition in the Field,” SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting, 2017, pp. 42-46. |
Li C., et al., “Improving Streamer Data Sampling and Resolution via Non-Uniform Optimal Design and Reconstruction,” SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting, 2017, pp. 4241-4245. |
Li C., et al., “Interpolated Compressive Sensing for Seismic Data Reconstruction,” SEG Las Vegas 2012 Annual Meeting, 2012, 6 pages. |
Li C., et al., “Joint Source Deblending and Reconstruction for Seismic Data,” SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting, 2013, pp. 82-87. |
Li C., et al., “Marine Towed Streamer Data Reconstruction Based on Compressive Sensing,” SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting, 2013, pp. 3597-3602. |
Lin D., et al., “3D Srme Prediction and Subtraction Practice for Better Imaging”, 2005, SEG Houston Annual Meeting, 5 pgs. |
Liu B., et al., “Minimum Weighted Norm Interpolation of Seismic Records,” Geophysics, Nov.-Dec. 2004, vol. 69(6), pp. 1560-1568. |
Lotter T., et al., “Noise Reduction by Maximum a Posteriori Spectral Amplitude Estimation with Supergaussian Speech Modeling,” International Workshop on Acoustic Echo and Noise Control (IWAENC2003), Kyoto, Japan, retrieved from URL: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/06e2/ad185cc5a809bb7493f8aea8afdad13105fb.pdf, on Nov. 16, 2019, Sep. 2003, pp. 83-86. |
Mahdad A., et al., “Separation of Blended Data by Iterative Estimation and Subtraction of Blending Interference Noise,” Geophysics, vol. 76(3), May-Jun. 2011, pp.Q9-Q17. |
Martin J., et al., “Acquisition of Marine Point Receiver Seismic Data With a Towed Streamer,” SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2000, 4 pages. |
Maurer H., et al., “Recent advances in optimized geophysical survey design,” Seismic Data Acquisition, Geophysics, Sep.-Oct. 2010, vol. 75(5), SEG Press Book, pp. 75A177-75A194. |
Memorandum Opinion and Order, ConocoPhillips Company v. In-Depth Compressive Seismic, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. H-18-0803, entered Apr. 26, 2019, 49 pgs. |
Milton A., et al., “Reducing Acquisition Costs with Random Sampling and Multidimensional Interpolation,” SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting, 2011, pp. 52-56. |
Moldoveanu N., “Random Sampling: A New Strategy for Marine Acquisition,” SEG Expanded Abstracts, Denver, CO, 2010 Annual Meeting, 2010, pp. 51-55. |
Mosher C., et al., “Increasing the Efficiency of Seismic Data Acquisition Via Compressive Sensing,” Offshore Technology conference, Asia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Mar. 25-28, 2014, 4 pages. |
Mosher C.C., et al., “An In-situ Analysis of 3-D Seismic Lateral Resolution,” Borehole Geophysics, BHG 6.3, 1985, pp. 109-111. |
Mosher C.C., et al., “Compressive Seismic Imaging: Moving from research to production,” SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting, 2017, pp. 74-78. |
Mosher C.C., et al., “Compressive Seismic Imaging,” SEG Las Vegas 2012 Annual Meeting, 2012, DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2012-1460.1, 5 pages. |
Mosher C.C., et al., “Non-Uniform Optimal Sampling for Seismic Survey Design,” 74th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Extended Abstracts, X034, Copenhagen, Denmark, Jun. 4-7, 2012, 5 pages. |
Mosher C.C., et al., “Non-Uniform Optimal Sampling for Simultaneous Source Survey Design,” SEG Annual Meeting, 2014, pp. 105-109. |
Mosher C.C., “Generalized Windowed Transforms for Seismic Processing and Imaging,” 2012 Annual SEG Meeting Las Vegas, Nevada, One Petro, SEG-2012- 1196, Published by Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 4 pages. |
Musser J.A., et al., “Streamer Positioning and Spread Stabilization for 4D Seismic,” SEG 2006 Annual Meeting, New Orleans, 2006, 4 pages. |
Office Action for Canadian Patent Application No. 2800127, dated Oct. 18, 2017, 4 pages. |
Office Communication for EP Patent Application No. 11793092.5, dated Jul. 20, 2017 , 5 pages. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,846,248, In-Depth Geophysical, Inc., et al., v. ConocoPhillips Company, IPR 2019-00850, filed Mar. 20, 2019, Filewrapper, 1789 pages. |
Response to Office Action for Canadian Patent Application No. 2,800,127, dated Apr. 6, 2017, 27 pages. |
Sacchi M.D., “A Tour of High Resolution Transforms,” Frontiers & Innovation, CSPG, CSEG, CWLS Convention, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Expanded Abstracts, 2009, pp. 665-668. |
Shapiro H.S., et al., “Alias-Free Sampling of Random Noise,” SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 1960, vol. 8(2), pp. 225-248. |
Stolt R.H., “Seismic Data Mapping and Reconstruction,” Geophysics, May-Jun. 2002, vol. 67(3), pp. 890-908. |
Thomsen L., “Weak Elastic Anisotropy”, Geophysics, Oct. 1986, vol. 51, No. 10, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1954-1966. |
Trad D., “Interpolation and Multiple Attenuation with Migration Operators,” Geophysics, vol. 68(6), Nov.-Dec. 2003, pp. 2043-2054. |
Wang L., et al., “Distributed Reconstruction via Alternating Direction Method,” Hindawi Publishing Corporation, Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine, 2013, vol. 2013, Article ID 418747, pp. 1-7. |
Wang P., et al., “Model-Based Water-Layer Demultiple”, 2011, SEG San Antonio Annual Meeting, pp. 3551-3555. |
Wang Y., et al., “Recovery of Seismic Wavefields based on Compressive Sensing by an I1-norm Constrained Trust Region Method and the Piecewise Random Subsampling,” Geophysical Journal International, 2011(187), pp. 199-213. |
Zhang H., et al., “A Nonmonotone Line Search Technique and its Application to Unconstrained Optimization,” Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2004, vol. 14(4), pp. 1043-1056. |
Zwartjes P.M., et al., “Fourier Reconstruction of Non-uniformly Sampled, Aliased Data,” SEG Int'l Exposition and 74th Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado, Oct. 10-15, 2004, 4 pages. |
Zwartjes P.M., et al., “Fourier Reconstruction of Nonuniformly Sampled, Aliased Seismic Data,” Geophysics, Jan.-Feb. 2007, vol. 72(1), pp. V21-V32. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20220326405 A1 | Oct 2022 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62506859 | May 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 17073907 | Oct 2020 | US |
Child | 17846807 | US | |
Parent | 15641916 | Jul 2017 | US |
Child | 17073907 | US |