2 Post Stack Inversion

2-1
Seismic Inversion and AVO

applied to Lithologic Prediction

Part 3
Post-stack inversion theory
2-2
Introduction to Post-Stack Seismic
Inversion
Recall from our initial introduction that we will consider the
following inversion methods in this discussion:
Post-stack
Amplitude Inversion
Bandlimited
Inversion
Sparse-Spike
Inversion
Model-based
Inversion
An alternate name for bandlimited inversion is recursive
inversion, which will be discussed first.
Before discussing inversion, we will discuss the
convolutional model.
2-3
The Convolutional Model
The seismic trace is modeled as follows:

s(t) = w(t)*r(t) + n(t)

or: seismic = wavelet * reflectivity + noise
where * means convolution.
The assumptions are that the data is:
Post-stack data - the traces are zero-offset
There are no multiples
There are no AVO effects
The noise is random, white noise, uncorrelated with the
seismic. There is no coherent noise.
The wavelet is constant - not varying with time.
The seismic data are already migrated - each seismic trace
depends only on the reflectivity sequence directly below the
seismic trace location.
2-4
The synthetic to
the left illustrates
the equation of the
previous page for
the noise-free
case. Notice that
convolution with
the wavelet results
in a loss of
information.
2-5
In the frequency domain,
convolution is the product of
the reflectivity spectrum and
the wavelet spectrum, or
S(f) = W(f)R(f)

This means that the seismic
trace has lost both the high
frequency and the low
frequency portions of the
spectrum.

Deconvolution and inversion
attempt to recover these lost
regions. The method of
filling in the missing data
depends on the inversion
algorithm.
2-6
The Earths Reflectivity
- This equation is true only for vertical incidence rays. This means
that AVO effects are assumed to be negligible.
- If the seismic data does contain an AVO anomaly, the inversion
process will (erroneously) attribute the entire effect to changes in
density and velocity, rather than to changes in Poissons Ratio.
- Since the reflection coefficient depends only on the product of
density and velocity, and not on either individually, it follows that post-
stack inversion is incapable of solving separately for density or
velocity. Only impedance changes can be measured by inversion.
wave. - S or P either
i, layer of velocity = V
i layer of density = : where
i
i
Before discussing wavelet effects, let us look only at the reflectivity of

the earth, which consists of all the reflection coefficients. The
reflection coefficient for the i
th
interface is defined as:
i i 1 i 1 i
i i 1 i 1 i
i
V V
V - V
= R

+
+ +
+ +
2-7
Recursive Inversion
Recursive Inversion, also called bandlimited inversion, is the simplest
form of inversion. The reflection coefficient for the i
th
interface of N
layers can be written:
i 1 i
i 1 i
i
Z Z
Z - Z
= R
+
+
+
(
+
i
i
i 1 i
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Therefore, the impedance of the i +1
st
layer can be determined from
the i
th
layer:
2-8
Recursive Inversion
Seismic
raypath
Interface at
depth = d
Z
1
=
1
V
1
Z
2
=
2
V
2
R

t

Reflection at time
t = 2d/V
1
Geology Seismic
For a single layer, as shown
above, we can write:
(
+ R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Z Z
Z - Z
= R
1 2
1 2
1 2
2-9
Example from first exercise
Recall that we calculated the following wet and gas cases in
the first section using the Biot-Gassmann equations:

Wet: V
P
= 2500 m/s, V
S
= 1250 m/s, = 2.11 g/cc

Gas: V
P
= 2000 m/s, V
S
= 1310 m/s, = 1.95 g/cc

Let us add a shale with the following properties:

V
P
= 2250 m/s, V
S
= 1125 m/s, = 2.0 g/cc

2-10
Exercise 2-1
(A) Using the values on the previous slide, compute the P
and S-impedances for the three cases:

Z
Pgas
= Z
Pwet
=

Z
Sgas
= Z
Swet
=

Z
Pshale
= Z
Sshale
=

(B) Compute the P and S reflection coefficients for shale
over sand for the gas and wet cases:

R
Pgas
= R
Sgas
=

R
Pwet
= R
Swet
=
2-11
Exercise 2-1 Answers
(A) The P and S-impedances for the three cases are:

Z
Pgas
= 3900 m/s*g/cc Z
Sgas
= 2555

Z
Pwet
= 5275 Z
Swet
= 2638

Z
Pshale
= 4500 Z
Sshale
= 2250

(B) The P and S reflection coefficients for shale over sand
for the gas and wet cases are:

R
Pgas
= -0.071 R
Sgas
= 0.063

R
Pwet
= 0.079 R
Swet
= 0.079
2-12
Exercise 2-1
(C) Using the formula:

compute the gas and wet impedances for the P and S-
wave cases using the computed shale impedance for
the first layer and the reflection coefficients computed
in the first part of the exercise

Z
Pgas
=

Z
Pwet
=

Z
Sgas
=

Z
Swet
=
(
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
1 2
2-13
(C) The gas and wet impedances for the P and S-wave
cases are:
3900
0.071 1
0.071 - 1
4500
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Pgas
Pgas
Pshale Pgas
~
(
+
=
(
(
5275
0.079 1
0.079 1
4500
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Pwet
Pwet
Pshale Pwet
~
(
+
=
(
2553
0.063 1
0.063 1
2250
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Sgas
Sgas
Sshale Sgas
~
(
+
=
(
(
2638
0.079 1
0.079 1
2250
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Swet
Swet
Sshale Swet
~
(
+
=
(
2-14
Recursive Inversion of N layers
terms. all of product the : where
,
r 1
r 1
N
1 N
1 i i
i
1
z = z
=
+
[
Notice that for N layers, we can start at the first layer and
compute the impedance of each successive layer by recursively
applying this formula:
This is illustrated in the next slide.
2-15
Recursive Inversion
Applying recursive
inversion under
ideal conditions,
we can perfectly
recover the
impedance, as
shown on the right:
2-16
Recursive Inversion of N layers
In fact, there are two problems that are not
illustrated in the ideal case shown in the previous
slide:

- First, if there are errors in the reflectivity from
noise poor scaling, errors in the inversion will be
cumulative, and will get worse with time.

- Second, as will now be shown, a bigger problem is
with the convolution of the seismic wavelet. To
illustrate this problem, we will start with a simple,
but instructive, exercise.
2-17
Exercise 2-2

Using the recursive
inversion formula
given earlier, and
assuming that = 1
(i.e. V = Z) and V
1
=
1000 m/s, work out
the inverted
velocities for (a) a
single reflector, and
(b) the reflector
convolved with a
Ricker wavelet, as
shown on the left.
2-18

Note that we can only
recover the true value
for the change in
impedance if we have a
single spike, which is
not the case after
convolution with the
wavelet.
V
2
= 818 m/s
V
2
= 1500 m/s
V
1
= 1000 m/s
V
3
= 1227 m/s
V
4
= 1004 m/s
V
1
= 1000 m/s
2-19
The Problem with Recursive Inversion
First, the wavelet lobes cause low and high impedance
zones to appear on the inverted trace which are not
geologically valid.
Second, the low frequency component of the impedance
is lost.
Third, the true impedance value is never estimated due
to the first two problems.

As shown in the next exercise, the problem gets worse
with multiple reflections.
As shown in the previous exercise, there are three problems
with recursive inversion:
2-20
Exercise 2-3: More than one layer
Consider the impedance model shown below, with interfaces at
arbitrary times t
1
and t
2
. Compute the resulting reflectivity:
1000 1250 1500 750 1750
Acoustic Impedance (m/s*g/cc)
t
1
t
2
Z
1
= 1223
Z
2
= 1000
Z
3
= 1500
Reflectivity
0 0.1 0.2 -0.1 -0.2
2-21
Exercise 2-3: Answer
arbitrary times t
1
and t
2
1000 1250 1500 750 1750
t
1
t
2
Z
1
= 1223
Z
2
= 1000
Z
3
= 1500
Reflectivity
0 0.1 0.2 -0.1 -0.2
2-22
Exercise 2-4: Convolving with a wavelet
In the previous example the computed reflection coefficients are
r = (-0.1, 0.2). Letting the wavelet be w = (-1, 2, -1), and the
reflectors be three samples apart, we can convolve w with r to
produce the seismic trace using the following matrix multiply.
Graph the seismic trace to the right:
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(

2 . 0
4 . 0
2 . 0
1 . 0
2 . 0
1 . 0
0
0
0.2
0
0
0.1
0
0
1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1
Seismic Trace
0 0.2 0.4 -0.2 -0.4
t

2-23
The result looks like this:
Seismic Trace
0 0.2 0.4 -0.2 -0.4
t

First scaled
wavelet
Second scaled
wavelet
Exercise 2-4 Answer
2-24
Notice that the trace looks like the one below, and both wavelets
are separate. In other words, convolution has scaled the
wavelet by the value of each reflection coefficient, and shifted
the scaled wavelet to the location of the reflection coefficient.
Seismic Trace
0 0.2 0.4 -0.2 -0.4
t

First scaled
wavelet
Second scaled
wavelet
Convolving with a wavelet
2-25
The effect of zeros in the convolution
In the previous example we could have ignored the zeros at the
beginning and end of the reflectivity and got the same result.
Notice that this is equivalent to dropping the same column
number in the matrix as the row of the zero, as shown below:
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0
0
0.1
1 0 0 0
2 1 0 0
1 2 1 0
0 1 2 1
0 0 1 2
0 0 0 1
2-26
Exercise 2-5
Now, we will drop the zeros between the reflection coefficients, which
means the coefficients are one sample apart. Re-compute the seismic
trace using the matrix method just described. Use the box on the left
for your calculations. Draw the new trace on the right, putting zeros in
the first and last samples. How does this new trace compare with the
original trace?
Seismic Trace
0 0.2 0.4 -0.2 -0.4
t

(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
(
_
_
_
_
0.2
0.1
1 0
2 1
1 2
0 1
2-27
Exercise 2.5 Answer
Note that the resulting trace is tuned, meaning that the two
zero-phase wavelets have been merged into a single ninety-
degree wavelet.
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
(
2 . 0
5 . 0
4 . 0
1 . 0
2 . 0
1 . 0
1 0
2 1
1 2
0 1
Seismic Trace
0 0.2 0.4 -0.2 -0.4
t

0.5
2-28
Convolving with a wavelet
Notice that the new trace looks like the one below, and both
wavelets have tuned together. The result looks like a ninety
degree phase wavelet rather than the original zero phase
wavelet. (Phase will shortly be discussed).
Tuned
wavelet
Seismic Trace
0 0.2 0.4 -0.2 -0.4
t

0.5
2-29
Practical inversion schemes
Now that we have looked at the issues that make
inversion difficult, such as noise problems, wavelet
tuning, and the fact that recursive inversion only
works if a wavelet is not present, let us look at
practical schemes for inversion.

We will look at the following steps:

(1) Wavelet extraction
(2) Geological model-building
(3) Integrating the geological model with the inverted
seismic data.
2-30
Wavelets and wavelet extraction
As shown in the next figure, the wavelet is defined
completely by its amplitude and phase spectra.

- Over a limited frequency range, the phase spectrum
may often be approximated by a straight line.
- The intercept of the line is the constant phase
rotation which best characterizes this wavelet.
-The slope of the line measures the time-shift of the
wavelet.

The wavelet on the next page is an example of a
minimum phase wavelet.
2-31
A typical wavelet
2-32
Wavelets in the earth vary both laterally(spatially) and temporally for
a variety of reasons:

Near surface effects (space variant)
Frequency-dependent absorption (space and time variant)
Inter-bed multiples (space and time variant)
NMO stretch
Processing artifacts

We usually assume that the wavelet is constant with time and space:
Time invariant : This means that the inversion is optimized
for a limited time window.
Space invariant : This assumes that the data has been
processed optimally to remove spatial variations in the
wavelet.
Wavelet extraction
2-33
The following methods can be used for wavelet extraction:

(1) Estimate amplitude spectrum using the the seismic data alone.
The phase is assumed known from some other source. Methods
include autocorrelation, maximum entropy spectral analysis, and
cross spectral analysis.

(2) Estimate both amplitude and phase spectra from the seismic
data alone. Methods include minimum entropy wavelet estimation
and higher order moments. Note that these methods can be quite
unstable.

(3) Estimate both amplitude and phase spectra using deterministic
measurements, such as marine signatures and VSP analysis.

(4) Estimate both amplitude and phase spectra using both seismic
and well log measurements.

(5) Estimate amplitude spectrum and a constant phase spectrum
using both seismic and well log measurements.

Wavelet extraction
2-34
A zero-phase seismic wavelet
(a) The wavelet estimated
using from the amplitude
spectrum of the seismic data.
(b) The amplitude spectrum of
the wavelet.
2-35
A general problem with wavelet extraction is that:

To extract a wavelet using logs, an optimum correlation
must be done first.

To perform correlation properly, the wavelet must already
be known.

A practical wavelet extraction procedure is as follows:

(1) Use statistical wavelet extraction to determine a preliminary
wavelet. This assumes that the approximate phase of the wavelet
is known.

(2) Stretch/squeeze the logs to tie the seismic data

(3) Extract a new wavelet using the well logs.

(4) Possibly repeat steps (2) and (3).
Wavelet Extraction
2-36
Non-uniqueness why we need a model
All inversion algorithms suffer from the non-uniqueness
problem.
This means that there is more than one possible
geological model consistent with the seismic data.
The only way to decide between the possibilities is to use
other information, not present in the seismic data.
This other information is usually provided in two ways:
the initial guess model
constraints on how far the final result may deviate
from the initial guess
This means that the final result always depends on the
other information as well as the seismic data. This is
shown in the next slide.
2-37
A solution for non-uniqueness
The flowchart above shows the general procedure for inversion.
In the next few slides, we will look at building the model.
Seismic
Data
Geological
Constraints
Optimum
Section
Geological
Model
Combine
and
Invert
Final
Inversion
2-38
The initial guess model
The initial guess model consists of an impedance log, which must be measured in
2-way travel time. Since the original logs are measured in depth, a critical step is
depth-to-time conversion. The depth-to-time conversion is made using a depth-
time table which maps each depth to the two-way travel time from the datum
(surface) to that depth.
2-39
The depth-time table is usually calculated from the sonic log velocities by:

where: t
j
= time down to layer j
d
j
= thickness of layer j
V
j
= velocity of layer j
Note: The time to an event depends on all the velocities above that layer,
including the first velocity to the surface, V
1
. That velocity is unknown and is
usually approximated by extrapolating the first measured velocity back to the
surface:
i
1 = j
j
j
i
V
d
2 = t
2-40
If the well is deviated, it must be corrected to vertical and the correction
made from KB to datum:

Dm = Measured depth from KB
Dv = Vertical depth from KB
Ds = Vertical depth from datum
T = Two-way time from datum
2-41
The depth-time table calculated from the sonic log is rarely sufficient to
produce a model impedance which ties the seismic data properly
because:
The seismic datum and log datum may be different.
The average first layer velocity is not known.
Errors in the sonic log velocities produce cumulative errors in the
calculated travel-times.
The events on the seismic data may be mispositioned due to
migration errors.
The seismic data may be subject to time stretch caused by
frequency-dependent absorption and short-period multiples.

To improve the depth-time table two procedures are used:
Apply check shot corrections.
Apply manual log correlation to the seismic data
2-42
Check shot corrections
The depth-time table calculated from the sonic log must be
modified to reflect the desired check shot times:
2-43
(1) Change all the
velocities in the log in such
a way that the new log will
integrate to exactly the
desired times.
(2) Change the velocities
for layers between the
first and last check shot
depth only.
(3) Do not change the
velocities in the sonic log
and use the depth-time
table for the conversion
from depth to time.
Check shot corrections - options
2-44
Log correlation
Log correlation is the process of applying a manual correction to the depth-
time curve to optimize the correlation between initial model and seismic
data. Correlation consists of selecting events on the synthetic trace and the
corresponding events on the real trace. The choice of wavelet is crucial.
2-45
(a) The picks used for
the correlation between
the synthetic and the
seismic data.
(b) The correlated
seismic after stretching
and squeezing the log.
Log correlation
2-46
The correlation of the seismic data and the synthetic from the
previous correlation. The symmetry of the correlation shows that the
zero-phase wavelet is correct. The correlation coefficient is 0.86
Log correlation
2-47
(a) The equivalent check-shot
correction for the preceding picks using
a linear interpolation.
(b) The equivalent
check-shot correction
using a spline
interpolation.
Log Correlation
2-48
Interpolating the logs
An impedance model can be built by stretching and squeezing the sonic
and density logs laterally across the seismic volume. Picking two or
more events is equivalent to applying a variable check-shot at each trace.
The material between the two picked events is stretched/squeezed.
2-49
When more than one well is entered into the model, the results are
interpolated using inverse-distance weighting. Using picked events
with multiple logs forces the inverse distance interpolation to be guided
by the picked events.
Interpolating the logs
2-50
Inversion Schemes
Now that we have discussed the convolutional
model and the initial guess impedance model, we
will discuss the various inversion algorithms.
We will start with bandlimited recursive inversion.
We will then briefly discuss the new coloured
inversion method.
Next, we will discuss model-based inversion.
Finally, we will discuss sparse-spike inversion.
2-51
Now that we have discussed the general procedure for
computing a model, lets see how we can incorporate the
model using different inversion schemes. We will start
with the recursive inversion approach, shown in the next
slide. Incorporating the model involves the following
steps:

(1)Deconvolve the data using the extracted wavelet.
(2)Scale the seismic trace to true reflectivity.
(3)Recursively invert each trace, using the formula
described earlier.
(4)Add in the low frequency component of the model.
Recursive, bandlimited inversion
2-52
Sonic/Density
Logs
Scaled
Seismic Data
Recursively
Invert
Low Pass
Filter
Add
Bandlimited
Inversion
Recursive inversion
The above flowchart shows the general implementation of
bandlimited inversion.
2-53
Bandlimited inversion
The resulting initial guess model for various settings of the high-cut
frequency is shown below:
2-54
Issues in recursive inversion
We assume that the samples in the seismic trace are actually
reflection coefficients. This means that we assume that there is no
seismic wavelet.
We assume that the samples are scaled properly. Reflection
coefficients must be numbers between -1 and +1. Seismic samples
may have any amplitude.
Since the equation is applied recursively from top to bottom of the
trace, the effect of errors is cumulative.
The greatest effect of this cumulative error is in the trend or low-
frequency component of the answer. This trend is so poorly defined
that we remove the trend from the answer and replace it with the trend
from the model.
The process is called bandlimited because the final impedance
traces are defined within the same frequency band as the input
seismic data.
2-55
Scaling the result
The Convolutional Model is used as the basis for all inversion:

Trace = Wavelet * Reflectivity + Noise

In the frequency domain, this can be approximated by:

Reflectivity = Trace / Wavelet

To solve for the reflectivity, the wavelet must be known. Normally,
when a wavelet is extracted, only its shape is known; not its absolute
amplitude. Inversion requires that the absolute amplitude be known
as well. From the equation above, if the wavelet is multiplied by 2,
the resulting reflectivity will be divided by 2.

A good way to determine the scaling of the wavelet automatically is
to force the root-mean-square amplitude of the initial guess synthetic
to be equal to the root-mean-square amplitude of the real trace.
2-56
Scaling the Result
Good Scaling:

Scaling too low:

Scaling too
high:
2-57
The density component
The coefficients, a and b, can be derived by a least-squares fit using all
the wells in your area. Note that the equation is linearized by taking the
logarithm of both sides.
25 . 0
V 23 . 0 =
b
aV =
As an arbitrary relationship, we can use the generalized Gardners
equation:
As we have seen, post-stack inversion can only give us the impedance,
not the velocity. If a density log is not available, a common
approximation is to use Gardners equation:
V ln b a ln ln + =
Note that post-stack inversion is incapable of deciding whether a
particular impedance change is a change in velocity, or a change in
density, or both. This procedure assumes that the change is distributed
between the two.
2-58
Examples of bandlimited inversion
In the next few slides, we shall see several
example of bandlimited, recursive inversion.
In our first example, we will use a wedge model.
Although this model is simple, we know what the
right answer should be and can therefore judge
the effectiveness of the method.
In the second example, we will look at a
carbonate reef from Alberta.
In the reef example, we want to see how well the
method can image the porosity.
2-59
Wedge model
A good illustration of inversion is provided by using the simple wedge
model. The figure on the left shows the basic seismic model with the
velocity log inserted at CDP 45. The wavelet and its amplitude spectrum
are on the right.
2-60
Wedge model
Here is the initial velocity model for the wedge inversion, created by
picking the four major events and squeezing the velocity log. The
colour bar is on the right.
2-61
Wedge model
The above figure shows the bandlimited recursive inversion of the
wedge model. The extra events seen throughout the inversion are due
to the wavelet sidelobes.
2-62
Reef example
Next, we will consider the inversion of a pinnacle reef from Alberta,
Canada. We will first look at one line from a 3D survey that goes over
the discovery well. The seismic section is shown above, with the
synthetic seismogram inserted at the well location. The zone of interest
is at 1150 ms.
2-63
Reef example
Above is shown the initial model for the reef inversion. Notice that the
velocities from the well have be stretched and squeezed laterally using
three picked events. The box indicates the zone displayed in the
following inversions.
2-64
Reef Example
Here is the bandlimited recursive inversion around the zone of interest
using a 10 Hz high-cut filter. Notice the reef porosity below 1160 ms.
2-65
Reef Example
Here is the bandlimited recursive inversion around the zone of interest
using a 20 Hz high-cut filter. Notice that there is more effect from the
model than there was using a 10 Hz high-cut.
2-66
Coloured Inversion
Coloured inversion is an inversion technique
developed by Lancaster and Whitcombe of BP
(SEG Expanded Abstracts, 2000, p 1572-1575).
In this approach, inversion is performed by
designing an operator that maps the mean
seismic amplitude spectrum to the mean earth
acoustic impedance amplitude spectrum, with a
-90
o
phase shift.
This operator is then applied to the seismic
data.
2-67
Time domain response of the coloured inversion
operator.
Coloured Inversion
2-68
Coloured inversion result showing relative impedance
changes.
Coloured Inversion
2-69
Model based inversion
Model based inversion also follows from the convolutional model:

seismic = wavelet * reflectivity + noise

We assume that:

the seismic trace is known
the wavelet is known
the noise is uncorrelated and random

Model based inversion differs from bandlimited inversion in that the
reflectivity is defined as that sequence which fits the data best. That
is, if we can find a reflectivity which convolves with the wavelet to give
a good approximation to the seismic trace, we assume that this is the
right answer.

In practice, Model Based Inversion starts with an initial guess and
improves on it by a series of steps.
2-70
Synthetic
Seismic
Seismic
Data
Update
Impedance
Inversion =
Model
The above flowchart shows the general implementation of model
based inversion.
Wavelet Acoustic
Impedance
Difference
Small
Error?
Yes
No
2-71
Model Based Inversion
Model-based inversion minimizes an objective function of this form:

J = weight
1
x (T - W*r) + weight
2
x (M - H*r)
where:
T = the seismic trace

W = the wavelet

r = the final reflectivity

M = the initial guess model impedance

H = the integration operator which convolves
with the final reflectivity to produce the
final impedance
* = convolution
2-72
The objective function has two parts:

Minimizing the first part, T - W*r, forces a solution which models the
seismic trace.

Minimizing the second part, M - H*r, forces a solution which models the
initial guess impedance using the specified block size.

These two conditions are usually incompatible. The weights, weight
1
and
weight
2
, determine how the two parts are balanced. This is called a soft
constraint. As a further constraint, called a hard constraint, we can force
the final answer to stay within the hard limits as shown below:
2-73
The initial guess model is blocked to a series of uniform blocks with this
size. The final inversion result may change the size of the blocks, but the
number of blocks is still the same. This means that some blocks get bigger
and some get smaller, while the average is kept constant.

Using a small block size (2 ms) will increase the resolution, but the
increased detail may be coming from the initial guess.

Using a small block size will always improve the fit between the input trace
and the final synthetic trace.
2-74
The seismic trace:

The wavelet:

The initial guess impedance:

Step 1: Block the initial guess impedance with a uniform block size.
2-75
Step 2: Form a synthetic trace by convolving the blocky impedance with the known wavelet:

Step 3: Compare the synthetic trace with the real trace.

Step 4: Modify both the amplitudes and thickness of the blocks to improve the fit:

Repeat this process through a series of iterations.
2-76
Potential problems with Model Based Inversion:
(1) Sensitive dependence on the wavelet:

Inversion using the correct wavelet:

Inversion using the wrong wavelet
2-77
Potential problems with Model Based Inversion:
(2) Non-uniqueness. For a given wavelet, all these results fit the trace
about equally well:
2-78
Inversion diagnostics
A good diagnostic for the quality of the final model based inversion
result is the error plot, which is the difference between the seismic data
and the final synthetic. A typical error plot is shown below:
2-79
Examples of model based inversion
example of model based inversion.
In our first example, as in bandlimited inversion,
we will use a wedge model. Since we know what
the right answer should be, we can therefore
judge the effectiveness of the method.
Again, in the reef example, we want to see how
well the method can image the porosity.
We will also look at the effect of changing
several of the key parameters in model based
inversion.
2-80
Wedge model
The above figure shows the model based inversion of the wedge
model. The result is better than bandlimited recursive inversion, but
starts to break down on the left, when thin bed tuning effects are
encountered.
2-81
This is the original
model:
This model was
created by deleting
the horizon at the
base of the wedge:
Wedge Model
Next, we will consider the effect of changing the initial model, as
shown above.
2-82
Original Model and Inversion
Inversion with horizon removed
Wedge model
2-83
Reef example
Here is the model based inversion around the zone of interest using a
6 ms block size. Notice that there is more detail than in recursive
bandlimited inversion and that the boundaries are more clearly
indicated.
2-84
Reef example
Here is the model based inversion around the zone of interest using a
2 ms block size. Notice that there is more detail than in the previous
inversion, but that this detail may be coming from the model rather
than the seismic.
2-85
Here is the full 3D inversion
of the reef structure, where
the top figure shows a
structure slice averaged
over the reef porosity, and
the figure on the right
shows the inverted result
superimposed on the reef
structure.
Reef example
2-86
Sparse-spike inversion
Sparse-spike inversion attempts to recover a sparse estimate of the
earths reflectivity from the seismic trace. There are two separate
approaches in the literature for performing sparse-spike inversion, the
maximum-likelihood (ML) approach (Chi, C. Y., Mendel, J. M. and
Hampson, D., 1984, A computationally fast approach to maximum-
likelihood deconvolution: Geophysics, 49, 550-565 ) and the Linear
Programming (LP) approach (Oldenburg, D. W., Scheuer, T. and Levy,
S., 1983, Recovery of the acoustic impedance from reflection
seismograms: Geophysics, 48, 1318-1337). Briefly:
Maximum-likelihood sparse-spike inversion performs the
sparse-spike estimate in the time domain by assuming that the
reflectivity has a Poisson distribution.
Linear programming sparse-spike inversion performs the
sparse-spike estimate in the frequency domain by assuming
that the central frequency range is correct and the upper and
lower frequencies constrain the spike series to be sparse.
2-87
Sparse-spike inversion ML approach
Maximum-likelihood Sparse Spike Inversion assumes that the actual reflectivity
can be thought of as a series of large spikes embedded in a background of small
spikes:
Sparse Spike Inversion assumes that only the large spikes are meaningful.
It finds the location of the large spikes by examining the seismic trace.
2-88
Sparse Spike Inversion builds up the reflectivity sequence one spike at a
time. Spikes are added until the trace is modelled accurately enough. The
amplitudes of the impedance blocks are determined using the model-based
inversion algorithm.
2-89
For maximum-likelihood sparse-spike inversion needs to know the
following information in order to perform inversion:

Maximum Number of Spikes

This tells the algorithm the maximum number of allowable
spikes per trace, and is normally the same as the total
number of samples in the window to be inverted.

Spike Detection Threshold

As each spike is added, its amplitude is compared with the
average amplitude of all spikes detected so far. When the
new amplitude is less than a specified fraction of the
average, the algorithm stops adding spikes.
2-90
Examples of ML sparse-spike inversion
example of ML sparse-spike inversion.
In our first example, as in bandlimited inversion,
we will use a wedge model. Since we know what
the right answer should be, we can therefore
judge the effectiveness of the method.
Again, in the reef example, we want to see how
well the method can image the porosity.
We will also look at the effect of changing
several of the key parameters in sparse-spike
inversion.
2-91
Wedge model
The above figure shows the sparse-spike inversion of the wedge
model. The result is similar to model based inversion but shows some
vertical striping. However, it has done better in the thin bed tuning
region.
2-92
Reef example
Here is the sparse-spike inversion around the zone of interest using a
100 spikes and an amplitude threshold of 5%. The result is comparable
to model based inversion, but shows more vertical blocking.
2-93
Reef example
Here is the sparse-spike inversion around the zone of interest using a 100
spikes and an amplitude threshold of 15%. The result is definitely less
realistic than the previous result using a threshold of 5%.
2-94
The linear programming (LP) approach to sparse-spike inversion assumes
that the amplitude spectrum of the seismic trace can be divided as follows
(figure is from Sparse Spike Inversion and the Resolution Limit, given by
Qing Li at the 2002 CSEG Convention):
Sparse-spike inversion LP approach
We first perform an optimal deconvolution to recover the seismic band of
frequencies. We then constrain the output trace to be as sparse as possible,
so that we recover both the high and low frequency bands. The solution is
done using an L1 norm, and is implemented with a linear programming
algorithm.
2-95
Here is an example from the paper by Oldenburg et al (1983):
2-96
For linear programming sparse-spike inversion the following parameters are
important:

Sparseness

Ranging from 100% (as sparse as possible) to 0% (as dense as
possible.

Window length

The speed of calculation can be improved by shortening the
window length used to compute frequency domain constraints.
Of course, this will also reduce the accuracy of the inversion.

Maximum constraint frequency

Since no algorithm can recover the low band signal reliably (as
discussed earlier) this parameter brings in model values up to this
maximum frequency.

We will now look at some examples, using the above parameters.
2-97
We will start with a series of tests using the blocky model impedance shown
above. This figure and the ones that follow are taken from Sparse Spike
Inversion and the Resolution Limit, given by Qing Li at the 2002 CSEG
Convention
2-98
The bottom curve is the initial model. The black trace in the middle is the input
seismic and the red trace is the synthetic trace calculated with the initial
model.
2-99
The model displayed in red at the bottom of the figure is the inverted
impedance model. The synthetic trace calculated with the inverted model
matches with the input seismic trace perfectly. It yields a very small residual
error, which is displayed at the top of the figure.
2-100
We will now use a different starting model, as shown above. The bottom
curve is the initial model. The black trace in the middle is the input seismic
and the red trace is the synthetic trace calculated with the initial model.
2-101
The model displayed in red at the bottom of the figure is the inverted impedance
model. The synthetic trace calculated with the inverted model matches with the
input seismic trace perfectly. It yields a very small residual error, which is
displayed at the top of the figure.
2-102
The figure above shows a real data example. The initial model at the bottom is
extracted from nearby well log data. The input seismic trace displayed as a black
curve in the middle is extracted from a post-stack seismic volume. The red trace
is a synthetic trace calculated from the initial model.
2-103
Figure 8 shows the inversion result with 100% sparseness, a 256 sample
window length, and a 5 Hz maximum constraint frequency. The inverted model
shows blocky characteristics. The synthetic seismic trace calculated with this
model matches well with the real seismic data. In the following tests, the
parameters are the same as above except when noted.
2-104
Figure 8 shows the inversion result using a sparseness of 50%. The inverted
model shows less blocky characteristics than the inversion with 100%
sparseness. The synthetic seismic trace calculated with this model still matches
well with the real seismic data.
2-105
Figure 8 shows the inversion result using a sparseness of 20%. The inverted
model shows less blocky characteristics than the inversion with 100% or 50%
sparseness. However, the synthetic seismic trace calculated with this model still
matches well with the real seismic data.
2-106
Figure 8 shows the inversion result using a window length of 128 samples. The
inverted model does not match the seismic as well as the inversion using a 256
sample window length.
2-107
Figure 8 shows the inversion result using a window length of 56 samples. The
inverted model does not match the seismic as well as the inversion using either a
256 sample or 128 sample window length.
2-108
Figure 8 shows the inversion result using a maximum constraint frequency of 5
Hz. Notice the low frequency error that has been introduced into the error, since
we ignored more of the low frequencies in the seismic data.
2-109
Sparse-spike inversion summary
Sparse Spike Inversion

Puts events only where the seismic demands.

Attempts to produce the simplest possible model consistent with the data.

Often produces fewer events than are known to be geologically true.
Less dependent on initial-guess model

Model-based Inversion

Puts events where the initial guess model (user) demands.

Produces the closest model to the initial guess, which is also consistent with
the seismic data.

Can produce higher-resolution results than supported by seismic alone.
Subject to non-uniqueness. Dependent on initial-guess model.
2-110
A North Sea example
In the next slide, we will consider an inversion
example of a taken from a field in the North Sea.
This example consists of a fluvial clastic
anomaly.
The model based inversion result shown here
gives a good indication of the lateral extent of the
sand body, especially when shown in colour
superimposed on the sand structure.
2-111
Average velocity over sand event.
V ft/s
North Sea Inversion Example
2-112
Velocity draped on sand structure.
V ft/s
North Sea Inversion Example
2-113
Conclusions
This has been a overview of the post-stack
inversion approach and three specific methods
which are used for the inversion itself.
We first discussed the common factors in all three
methods, which involved getting a good wavelet
estimate and building an accurate model.
We then considered the simplest method,
bandlimited recursive inversion, with examples.
After this, we looked at model based inversion, and
looked at examples.
Finally, we discussed sparse-spike inversion, and
looked at examples.
In general, the model based approach produces the
most geologically consistent results.
2-114
(A) The P and S-impedances for the three cases are:

Z
Pgas
= 3900 m/s*g/cc Z
Sgas
= 2555

Z
Pwet
= 5275 Z
Swet
= 2638

Z
Pshale
= 4500 Z
Sshale
= 2250

(B) The P and S reflection coefficients for shale over sand
for the gas and wet cases are:

R
Pgas
= -0.071 R
Sgas
= 0.063

R
Pwet
= 0.079 R
Swet
= 0.079
2-115
(C) The gas and wet impedances for the P and S-wave
cases are:
3900
0.071 1
0.071 - 1
4500
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Pgas
Pgas
Pshale Pgas
~
(
+
=
(
(
5275
0.079 1
0.079 1
4500
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Pwet
Pwet
Pshale Pwet
~
(
+
=
(
2553
0.063 1
0.063 1
2250
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Sgas
Sgas
Sshale Sgas
~
(
+
=
(
(
2638
0.079 1
0.079 1
2250
R - 1
R + 1
Z = Z
Swet
Swet
Sshale Swet
~
(
+
=
(
2-116

Note that we can only
recover the true value
for the change in
impedance if we have a
single spike, which is
not the case after
convolution with the
wavelet.
V
2
= 818 m/s
V
2
= 1500 m/s
V
1
= 1000 m/s
V
3
= 1227 m/s
V
4
= 1004 m/s
V
1
= 1000 m/s
2-117
Exercise 2-3: Answer
arbitrary times t
1
and t
2
1000 1250 1500 750 1750
t
1
t
2
Z
1
= 1223
Z
2
= 1000
Z
3
= 1500
Reflectivity
0 0.1 0.2 -0.1 -0.2
2-118
The result looks like this:
Seismic Trace
0 0.2 0.4 -0.2 -0.4
t

First scaled
wavelet
Second scaled
wavelet
Exercise 2-4 Answer
2-119
Exercise 2.5 Answer
Note that the resulting trace is tuned, meaning that the two
zero-phase wavelets have been merged into a single ninety-
degree wavelet.
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
(
2 . 0
5 . 0
4 . 0
1 . 0
2 . 0
1 . 0
1 0
2 1
1 2
0 1
Seismic Trace
0 0.2 0.4 -0.2 -0.4
t

0.5
2-120
Deconvolution and Inversion
We can deconvolve the seismic trace exactly if we know the wavelet
matrix exactly (that is, the wavelet values and the positions of the
reflection coefficients). This can be done using the generalized
inverse solution r = (W
T
W)
-1
W
T
r, as shown below:
(
=
(
=
(
=
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
2 . 0
1 . 0
2 . 1
6 . 0
6 / 1 0
0 6 / 1
2 . 1
6 . 0
6 0
0 6
r
2 . 0
4 . 0
2 . 0
1 . 0
2 . 0
1 . 0
1 2 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 2 1
1 0
2 0
1 0
0 1
0 2
0 1
1 2 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 2 1
r
1
1
2-121
Exercise 2-6
Deconvolve the seismic trace from the previous exercise, and see if
the correct reflectivity can be extracted.
2-122
Exercise 2-6 solution
Again, we can deconvolve the seismic trace exactly if we know the
wavelet matrix exactly (that is, the wavelet values and the positions of
the reflection coefficients).
(
=
(
=
(

=
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
2 . 0
1 . 0
6 . 1
4 . 1
6 4
4 6
20
1
6 . 1
4 . 1
6 4
4 6
r
2 . 0
5 . 0
4 . 0
1 . 0
1 2 1 0
0 1 2 1
1 0
2 1
1 2
0 1
1 2 1 0
0 1 2 1
r
1
1

2 Post Stack Inversion

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

2 Post Stack Inversion

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

2-1

Seismic Inversion and AVO

Before discussing wavelet effects, let us look only at the reflectivity of

S-ar putea să vă placă și