Introduction
to
Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian H. Russell
HampsonRussell
SoftwareServices,Ltd.
Calgary,Alberta
Course Notes Series, No. 2
S. N. Domenico, Series Editor
Societyof Exploration
Geophysicists
Thesecoursenotesare publishedwithoutthe normalSEGpeerreviews.
They havenot beenexaminedfor accuracyand clarity.Questionsor
commentsby the readershouldbe referreddirectlyto the author.
ISBN 9780931830488
ISBN 9780931830655
(Series)
(Volume)
Libraryof Congress
CatalogCardNumber8862743
Societyof Exploration
Geophysicists
P.O.
Box 702740
Tulsa, Oklahoma 741702740
1988 by the Societyof Exploration
Geophysicists
All rightsreserved.
Thisbookor portionshereofmaynotbe reproduced
in anyformwithoutpermission
in writingfromthe publisher.
Reprinted1990, 1992, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009
Printed in the United States of America
]:nl;roduct1 on o Selsmic I nversion thods
Table
Bri an Russell
of Contents
PAGE
Part
Introduction
12
Part
The Convolution
Model
21
2.4 The Noise Component
22
26
212
218
Recursive
31
2.1 Tre Sei smic Model
2.2 The Reflection Coefficient
2.3
Part
Part
The Seismic
Wavelet
Inversion
 Theory
3.1
Discrete
3.2
Problems encountered
Inversion
3.3
Continuous
with
data
41
4. !
42
44
46
412
414
4.4
4.5
I ntroduc ti on
resolution
Lateral
resolution
Noise attenuation
Recursive
Inversion
 Practice
5.3 Seismically derived porosity
Sparsespike Inversi on
61
6.1
62
64
622
630
The recursive
inversion
method
5.2 Information in the low frequency component
6
I ntroduc ti on
6.2 Maximumlikelihood
6.3
6.4
P art
Part
51
52
510
516
5.1
P art
32
34
38
Seismic Processing Considerati ons
4.2 Ampli rude recovery
real
Inversion
4.3 Improvementof vertical
Part
Series
aleconvolution and inversion
The L I norm method
Reef Problem
I nversion applied to Thi nbeds
71
7.1 Thin bed analysis
7.Z Inversion comparison of thin beds
72
74
Modelbased
81
Inversion
B. 1 I ntroducti
8.2
Generalized
on .
linear
inversion
8.3 Seismic1ithologic roodelling (SLIM)
Appendix81 Matrix applications in geophysics
82
84
810
814
Introduction
Part
to Seismic
Traveltime
Inversion
Methods
Brian
91
Inversion
g. 1. I ntroducti
on
9.2 Numerical examplesof traveltime
9.3 Seismic Tomography
inversion
Part 10 Amplitude versus offset (AVO) Inversion
10.1 AVO theory
10.2 AVO inversion by GLI
92
94
910
101
102
108
Inversion
111
I ntroduc ti on
112
114
Part 11 Velocity
Theory and Examples
Part 12 Summary
121
Russell
Introduction
to Seismic nversion
Methods
Brian Russell
PART I  INTRODUCTION
Part
1  Introduction
Page 1 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
I NTRODUCT
ION TO SEI SMIC INVERSION METHODS
,
__
Part
This
_,
l_
Introduction
_
i.,.
course is intended as an overview of the current techniques used in
the inversion of seismic data. It would therefore seemappropriate to begin
by defining what is meant by seismic inversion. The most general definition
is
as fol 1 ows'
Geophysical inversion
involves
mapping the physical structure and
properties of the subsurface of the earth using measurementsmadeon
the surface of the earth.
The above definition
work that is done in
is so broad that it encompassesvirtually
seismic analysis
course we shall primarily 'restrict
and interpretation.
all
the
Thus, in this
our discussion to those inversion
methods
which attempt to recover a broadband pseudoacoustic impedance log from a
band1 imi ted
sei smic trace.
Another way to look at inversion is to consider it as the technique for
creating a model of the earth using the seismic data as input. As such, it
can be considered as the opposite of the forwar modelling technique, which
involves creating
a synthetic seismic
section
based on a model of the earth
(or, in the simplest case, using a sonic log as a onedimensional model). The
relationship between forward and inverse modelling is shownin Figure 1.1.
To understandseismic inversion, we must first
processes involved
therefore
in
the
look at the basic
creation of seismic data.
convolutional
model
understandthe physical
Initially,
we will
of the seismic trace
in the
time and frequencydomains,consideringthe three components
of this model:
reflectivity,
seismic wavelet, and noise.
Part
 Introduction
Page 1 
.
Introduction to Seismic InverSion Methods
FORWARDMODELL
I NG
i
Brian Russell
INVERSEMODELLING(INVERSION)
_
EARTH
MODEL
Input'
Process:
Output'
MODELLING
INVERSION
ALGORITHM
ALGORITHM
SEISMIC RESPONSE
i
mlm
ii
EARTH
MODEL
i
ii
Figure1.1 Fo.ard
' andsInverse
Model,ling
Part
I  Introduction
Page I 
Introduction.
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian lussel 1
Once we have an understanding of these concepts and the problems which
can occur, we are in a position to
look at
the methodswhich are currently
used to invert seismic data.
These methods are summarizedin Figure 1.2.
be on poststack seismic inversion where
primary emphasis of the course will
the
ultimate
resul.t,
The
as was previously
Oiscussed, is a
pseudoimpeaance
section.
We will
start by looking at
inversion,
the
most contanonmethods of
which are based on single trace recursion.
these recurslye
relationship
inversion
procedures,
it
the
unUerstand
important to look at the
between aleconvolution anU inversion, and how Uependent each
method is on the deconvolution scheme Chosen.
classical
is
To better
poststack
Specifically,
we will
consider
"whitening" aleconvolutionmethods, wavelet extraction methods, and
newer sparsespike deconvolution methods such as Maximumlikelihood
deconvolution
and the
L1
norm metboa.
Another important type of inversion methodwhich will be aiscussed is
modelbased inversion, where a geological moael is iteratively upUatedto finU
the
best
fit
with the seismic data.
After this,
traveltime
tomography,will be discussedalong with several illustrative
inversion,
or
examples.
After the discussion on poststack inversion, we shall move into the realm
of pretstack. These methoUs,still fairly new, allow us to extract parameters
other than impedance, such as density and shearwave velocity.
Finally,
we will
aiscuss the geological aUvantages anU limitations
each seismic inversion roethoU,looking at examples of each.
Part
1 
Introduction
Page i 
of
Introduction to SelsmicInversion Methods
Brian Russell
SEI SMI
C I NV
ERSI
ON
.METOS,,,
POSTSTACK
PRESTACK
INVERSION
INVERSION
EF
IEL
D
MODELBASED
I RECURSIVEWAV
TRAVELTIME
INVERSION
,INVESION
INVERSION
,,
I METHODS
]
!TOMOGRAPHY)
 "NARROWSPARSEBAND
Figure 1.2
Part
1  Introuuction

LINEAR
NVERSIOUMETHODS
i
SPIKE
A summaryof current inversion techniques.
Page 1 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brtan Russell
PART
2  THECONVOLUTIONAL
MODEL
Part
2  The Convolutional
Model
Page 2 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Part 2 
Brian Russell
The Convolutional
Mooel
2.1 Th'e Sei smic Model
The mostbasic and commonly
used oneOimensionalmoael for the seismic
trace is referreU
to as the convolutional
moOel, which states that the seismic
trace is simplythe convolutionof the earth's reflectivity with a seismic
source function
with the adUltion of a noise component. In
equation
form,
where * implies convolution,
s(t) : w(t) * r(t) + n(t)s
where
and
s (t)
= the sei smic trace,
w(t)
: a seismic wavelet,
r (t)
: earth refl ecti vi ty,
n(t)
: additive
noise.
An even simpler assumptionis to consiUerthe noise component
to be zero,
in which case the seismic tre is simply the convolution of a seismic wavelet
with te earth ' s refl ecti vi ty,
s(t)
In
= w{t) * r(t).
seismic processingwe deal exclusively with digital data, that
data sampled
at a constanttime interval.
is,
If weconsiUerthe relectivity to
consist of a reflection coefficient at each time sample(som of which can be
zero), and the wavelet to be a smooth function in time, convolutioncan be
thoughtof as "replacing"eachreflection. coefficient with a scaledversion of
the waveletandsumming
the result. The result of this processis illustrated
in Figures 2.1 and2.Z for botha "sparse"anda "dense"set of reflection
coefficients.
Notice that convolution
with
the wavelet tends to "smear" the
reflection coefficients. That is, there is a total loss of resolution,which
is the ability
to resolve closely spacedreflectors.
Part 2  The Convolutional
Model
Page
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Nethods
Brian Russell
WAVELET:
(a) '*
' ':'
REFLECTIVITY
TRACE:
Figure 2.1
(a)
Convolutionof a wavelet with a sparse"reflectivity.
(a) avelet. (b) Reflectivit.y. (c) Resu1ting Seismic Trace.
'?t
(b')
Fi ure 2.2
Convolution of a wavelet with a sonicderived
reflectivity.
,
Par
, ....
2  The Convolutional
(a) Wavelet. (b) Reflectivity.
i
L_
Model
"dense"
(c) SeismicTrace
'
Page 2 
Introduction
to Seismic
An alternate,
Inver'sion
Methods
Brian
but equivalent, way of
the frequency domain.
Russell
looking at the seismic trace is in
If we take the Fourier transform of
the previous
equati on, we may write
S(f)
where
= W(f) x R(f),
S(f) = Fouriertransform
of s(t),
W(f) = Fourier transform of w(t),
R(f) = Fourier transform of r(t),
In the above equation we see that
ana f = frequency.
convolution becomesmultiplication
in
the frequency domain. However, the Fourier transform is a complex function,
and it
is normal to consiUer the amplitude and phase spectra of the individual
components. The spectra of S(f) may then be simply expressed
esCf)= ew(f) + er(f),
where
I ndicates
amplitude
spectrum,
and
0
In
the
Figure 2.3
illustrates
the convolutional model
frequency domain. Notice that the time Oomainproblem of
resolution becomesone of loss of
reOuceo by the effects
2  The Convolutional
loss
of
frequency content in the frequency domain.
Both the high and low frequencies of the reflectivity
Part
other words, convolution involves multiplying the amplitude spectra
and adding the phase spectra.
in
indicates phase spectrum.
have been severely
of the seismic wavelet.
Mooel
Page ?. 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
AMPLITUDE
Brian Russell
SPECTRA
PHASE SPECTRA
w (f)
I
tR (f)
i i
,
i.
I
iit
loo
11
s (f)
i
i!
Figure 2.3
Part
2  The Convolutional
Convolution in the frequency domain for
the time series shown in Figure 2.1.
Model
Page 2 
Introduction
2.g
to Seismic
The Reflection
l_
,m
Inversion
Coefficient
_
m_
_,
Methods
Brian
Russell
Series
_ _
el
'The reflection coefficient series (or reflectivity,
as it is also called)
describedin theprevious
sectionis oneof thefundamental
physical
concepts
in the seismic method. Basically, each reflection coefficient maybe thought
of
as
the res ponse of the seismic wavelet to an acoustic impeUance change
within
the
ear th,
where acoustic impedance is defined as the proUuct of
compressi onal velocity and Uensity. Mathematically, converting from acoustic
involves dividing the difference in the acoustic
i ropedanceto re flectivity
impedances by the sum of the acoustic impeaances. This gives te
coefficient
at
the boundary between the two layers.
reflection
The equation is as
fo11 aws:
i+lVi+l iVi
i
where
Zi+l Zi
i+1
r = reflection
coefficient,
/o__density,
V  compressional velocity,
Z  acoustic impeUance,
and
Layer i overlies Layer i+1.
Wemust also convert from depth to time by integrating the sonic log
transit times. Figure .4 showsa schematicsonic log, density log, anU
resulting acoustic impedancefor a simplifieU
earth moael. Figure 2.$ shows
the resultof converting
to thereflection
coefficient
seriesandintegrating
to
time.
It should be pointed out that this formula is true only for the normal
incidence case, that is, for a seismic wave striking the reflecting interface
at right angles to the beds. Later in this course, we shall consider the case
of
Part
nonnormal
inciaence.
2  The Convolutional
Model
Page 2 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
STRATIGRAPHIC
Brian Russell
OENSITY
SONICLOG
SECTION
30O
4OO
loo
200
2.0
3.0
SHALE
LOG.
T (usec./mette)
.....
3600 m/s
DEPTH
SANOSTONE
. .
'I
 .. ,
!_1
vI
UMESTONEI I I ! I ! I 1
V3600
J
V= 6QO0
LIMESTONE
2000111
Fig. 2.4. BoreholeLogMeasurements.
REFLECTWrrY
ACOUSTIC
VS TWO.WAY
TIME
IMPED,MCE (2
(Yocrrv
mm
,mm
mm
mm
rome

V$ OEPTH
x OEaSn
20K .25
I
.am
Q.2S
I
.25
v
O
'
+ .2S
I
mm
SHALE .....
OEPTH
'[
SANDSTONE . . ...
!
!11
I1
UMESTONE
I I 1 I I I II
i ! I 1 i I i
SHALE .._.
1000m
1000 m

NO
.'
LIMESTONE
 20o0 m
2000 m
Fig.
2.5.
, ..
Creation of Reflectivity
Part g  The Convolutional Model
I SECOND
Sequence.
Page 2 
IntroductJ
on 1:o Sei stoic Inversion
Our best method of
derlye
Herhods
observing
them from well log curves.
Bri an Russell
seJsmc impedance and reflectivity
is o
Thus, we maycreate an impedancecurve
by
multiplying together he sonic and density logs from a well. Wemayhen
computethe reflectivlty by using he formula shownearlier. Often, we do not
have the density log available to us and must makedo with only the sonJc. The
approxJmatJonof velocJty to mpedance
1s a reasonable approxjmation, and
seemsto holdwell for clas;cics and carbonates(not evaporltes, however).
Figure 2.6 showsthe sonic and reflectJvty traces from a typJcal Alberta well
after they have been Jntegrated to twoway tlme.
As we shall see later,
the type of
aleconvolution and inversion used is
dependent on the statistical assumptionswhich are made about the seismic
reflectivity
and wavelet. Therefore, howcan we describe the reflectivity
seen
in
well?
reflectivity
The
traditional
to be a perfectly
answer has always been that
we consider
random sequence and, from Figure .6,
the
this
appears to be a good assumption. A ranUomsequencehas the property that
autocorrelation is a spike at zerolag.
autocorrelation are zero except the
its
That is, all the componentsof the
zerolag value, as shownin the following
equati on
t(Drt = ( 1 , 0 , 0 , .........
t
zerolag.
Let
2.7.
us test this idea on a theoretical
Notice that the
autocorrelation
of
random sequence, shownin
Figure
this sequence has a large spike at
the zeroth lag, but that there is a significant noise component at nonzero
lags. To have a truly random sequence, it must be infinite in extent. Also
on this figure is shown the autocorrelation of a well
log erived
reflectivity.
Wesee that it is even less "random"than the randomspike
sequence. Wewill discuss this in more detail on the next page.
Part
2  The Convolutional
Model
Page 2 
IntroductJon
to Se.s=c Inversion
Methods
Bran
Russell
RFC
Fg. 2.6. Reflectivitysequence
derivedfromsonJc
.log.
RANDOM
SPIKE SEQUENCE
AUTOCORREJATION
OF RANDOMSEQUENCE
Fig.
2.7.
WELL LOG DERIVED REFLECT1vrrY
AUTOCORRELATION
OF REFLECTIVITY
Autocorrelat4ons of random and well log
der4vedspike sequences.
Part
2  The Convolutional
Model
Page 2
Introductlon
to Sei smic Inversion
Methods
Therefore, the true earth reflectivity
truly
Brian Russel 1
cannot be consideredas being
random. For a typical Alberta well we see a numberof large spikes
(coresponding
to majorlithol ogic change)sticking up abovethe crowd.A good
way to describethis statistically is as a BernoulliGaussian
sequence. The
Bernoulli part of this term implies a sparsenessin the positions of the
spikes and the Gaussianimplies a randomness
in their amplitudes. Whenwe
generatesuch a sequence,there is a term, lambda, which controls the
sparsenessof the spikes. For a lambdaof 0 there are no spikes, and for a
lambdaof 1, the sequence
is perfectly Gaussian in distribution. Figure 2.8
shows a number of such series for different
typical Alberta well log reflectivity
values of lambda.
Notice that
wouldhavea lambdavalue in the 0.1 to
0.5 range.
Part
2  The Convolutional
Model
Page 2 
10
I ntroducti on to Sei smic I nversi on Methods
Brian Russell
It
tl
11 I
LAMBD^0.01
511 t
tl
(VERY SPARSE)
11
311
4#
511 I
#1
TZIIE
LAMBDAO.
(KS !
1,1
::." ';'"' "";''l'
"'r'
 "(11
I
TX#E
(HS)
LAMBDAI0.5
LAMBDA
1.0 (GAUSSIAN:]
EXAMPLESOF REFLECTIVITIES
Fig.
2.8.
Examplesof reflectivities
factor
to be discussed
using lambda
in Part
6.
Part 2  The Convolutional Model
Page 2 
11
Introduction
2.3
to Seismic Inversion ,Methods
The Seismic

Brian Russell
Wavelet
Zero Phase and Constant Phase Wavelets
m _
m _
The assumptiontha.t there is a single, welldefined wavelet which is
convolved with the reflectivity
to producethe seismic trace is overly
simplistic. Morerealistically, the wavelet is both timevarying and complex
in shape. However,the assumptionof a simple wavelet is reasonable, and in
this
section
we shall
consider
several
types
of
wavelets
and
their
characteristics.
First,
let us consider the Ricker wavelet, which consists of a peak and
two troughs, or side lobes. The Ricker wavelet is dependentonly on its
dominant frequency, that is, the peak frequencyof its alitude spectrum or
the inverse of the dominantperiod in the time domain(the dominantperiod is
found by measuringthe time from troughto trough). TwoRicker wave'lets are
shownin Figures 2.9 and 2.10 of frequencies 20 and 40 Hz. Notice that as the
anqlitude spectrumof a wavelet .is broadened,the wavelet gets narrower in the
timedomain,
indicatingan increase
of resolution.Ourultimatewaveletwould
be a spike, with a flat amplitude spectrum. Sucha wavelet is an unrealistic
goal in seismic processing, but one that is aimedfor.
The Rtcker wavelets of
Figures 2.9
and 2.10
are also zerophase, or
perfectly symmetrical. This is a desirable character.tstic of wavelets since
the energy is then concentrated at a positive peak, and the convol'ution of the
wavelet
with
a reflection
coefficient
will
better
resolve
that
reflection.
To
get an idea of nonzerophase wavelets, consider Figure 2.11, where a Ricker
wavelet
has been rotated by 90 degree increments, and Figure 2.12, where the
samewavelet has been shifted by 30 degree increments.
Notice that the 90
degree rotation
180 degree shift
displays perfect antisnmnetry, whereas a
simply inverts the wavelet.
Part
2  The Convolutional
The 30 degree rotations are asymetric.
Model
Page 2
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Fig.
2.9.
20 Hz Ricker
Wavelet'.
Fig.
.10.
40 Hz Ricker
wavelet.
Fig.
2.11.
Ricker
wavelet
rotated
by 90 degree increments
Fig.
2.12.
Ricker
wavelet
rotated
by 30 degree increments
Part
2  The Convolutional
Model
Page 2 
13
Introduction
to Seismic
Of course,
Inversion
a typical
frequencies than that
filer
Methods
seismic wavelet
shownin Figure 2.13,
would be noticeable
a larger
Consider the
range of
banapass
where we have passed a banaof frequencies
has also had cosine tapers applied between 5
and 15 Hz, and between60 and 80 Hz.
boxcar.
contains
shownon the Ricker wavelet.
between15 and 60 Hz. The filter
that
Brian Russell
The taper reduces the "ringing" effect
if the wavelet amplitude spectrum was a
The wavelet of Figure 2.13 is
simple
zerophase, and would be excellent as
a stratigraphic wavelet. It is often referred to as an Ormsbywavelet.
Minimum Phase Wavelets
The concept of minimumphaseis one that
is
vital
to aleconvolution, but
is also a concept that is poorly understood.
The reason for
understanding is that most discussions of
concept stress the mathematics
at
the
expense of
the
physical
the
interpretation.
use of minimumphaseis adapted from Treitel
The
this lack of
definition
we
and Robinson (1966):
For a given set of wavelets, all with the sameamplitude spectrum,
the minimumphase
waveletis the onewhichhasthe sharpest
leading
edge. That is, only wavelets which have positive
The reason that
time values.
minimumphase concept is important to us is
that
typical wavelet in dynamite work is close to minimumphase. Also, the wavelet
from the
seismic instruments
equivalent of the 5/1560/80
in the aefinition
is
also
zerophase wavelet is shownin Figure 2.14.
Part
As
used, notice that the minimumphasewavelet has no component
prior to time zero and has its energy
possible.
minimumphase. The minimumphase
concentrated
as close to the origin
as
The phase spectrum of the minimumwaveletis also shown.
2  The Convolutional
Model
Pa.qe 2 
14
Itroducton to Seistoic!nversionNethods.
ql
Re R
f1.38
Zero Phase Iauelt
5/1568Y88
0.6
 e.3e
Trace
iii
...... ,
.....
'
2be
Trace
Reg 1)
BranRussell
min,l
wavelet
Fig.
2.13. Zerophase bandpass
Fig.
2.14. Minimphase equivalent
of zerophase wavelet
shownin Fig. 2.13.
wavelet.
/1568/88 hz
18.00 p
Trace I
RegE
wayel
Speetnm
'188.88
Trace1
0.8
188
m,m,
Part 2 Th 'e Convolutional Model
Page 2
15
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Let us nowlook at the effect of different waveletson the reflectivity
function itself.
Figure 2.15 a anU b shows a numberof different
conv6lved with the reflectivity
in Figure Z.5.
(Trace 1) from the simple blocky model shown
The following wavelets have been used high frequency
zerophase (Trace ),
low frequencyzerophase(Trace ), high frequency
minimumphase (Trace 3),
figure,
wavelets
low frequency minimum phase (Trace 5).
From the
we can make the fol 1owing observations:
(1) Low freq. zerophase wavelet:
 Resolution of reflections
 Identification
(Trace 4)
is poor.
of onset of reflection
is good.
(Z) High freq. zerophase wavelet: (Trace Z)
 Resolution of reflections
 Identification
is good.
of onset of reflection
is good.
(3) Lowfreq. min. pase wavelet (Trace 5)
 Resolution
of reflections
i s poor.
 Identification of onset of reflection is poor.
(4) High freq. min. phase wavelet: (Trace 3)
 Resolution of refl ec tions is good.
 Identification
of onset of reflection
is poor.
Based on the aboveobservations, we wouldhave to consider the high
frequency,zerophase
waveletthe best, andthe lowfrequency,
minimum
phase
wavelet
Part
the
worst.
2  The Convolutional
Model
Page 2 
16
Introduction
!ql
RegR
to Seismic Inversion
Zer PhaseUaelet
,'1G1
Methods
14z
Russell
q2 RegC ZeroPhase
14aue16('
' 'le34B Hz
e
 . ['
Brian
'
,3 RecjB miniilium
phue
'
q Reg1) 'minimum
phase "
'
,leJ3e/4eh
'
17 .
e.e
(a)
//'"v,._,,
r
e.' ' "se''
,m
,,
Tr'oce
[b)
700
Fig.
2.15.
Convolution of four different
in (a) with trace I of (b).
shown on traces
Part
2  The Convolutional
Model
wavelets shown
The results are
2 to 5 of (b).
Page 2 
17
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
g.4 ThN.oi se.Co.mp.one
ntThe situation
that has been discussed so far is the ideal case.
That is,
we have interpreted every reflection wavelet on a seismic trace as being an
actual
reflection
from a
lithological
boundary.
Actually,
many of the
"wiggles"on a trace are not true reflections, but are actually the result
seismic noise.
of
Seismic noise can be grouped under two categories
(i) Random
Noise  noise which is uncorrelated from trace to trace and is
ue mainly to environmental factors.
(ii)
CoherentNoise  noise which is predictable on the seismic trace but
is unwanted. An exampleis multiple reflection interference.
Randomnoise can be thought of as the additive componentn(t) which was
seen in the equationon page 2g.
Correcting for this term is the primary
reason for stackingour ata. Stackingactually uoesan excellent job of
removing ranUomnoise.
Multiples, one of the major sources of coherent noise, are causedby
multiple "bounces"
of the seismic signal within the earth, as shownin Figure
2.16. They may be straightforward, as in multiple seafloor bouncesor
"ringing", or extremelycomplex,as typified by interbed multiples. Multiples
cannot be thoughtof as additive noise andmustbe modeledas a convolution
with the reflecti
vi ty.
Figure 2.17
shows the
theoretical
multiple
sequence which
generatedby the simple blocky modelshown on Figure . 5.
this
data,
it
is
Multiples maybe partially
powerful
the
multiples
be
removed by
stacking,
but
important that
elimination
technique.
aleconvolution, fk filter.ing,
Such
techniques
and inverse velocity
If
we are
effectively
would
to
be
invert
removed.
often require a more
include
stacking.
predictive
These techniques
wil 1 be consi alered in Part 4.
Part
2  The Convolutional
Model
Page 2 
18
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Fig.
2.16. Several multiple generating mechanisms.
TIME
TIME
[sec)
[sec)
0.7
REFLECTION
COEFFICIENT
SERIES
Fig.
Brian Russell
2.17.
0.7
R.C.S.
WITH
ALL
MULTIPLES
Reflectivi ty sequenceof Fig.
2.5.
with
and without multipl es.
Part 2  The ConvolutionalModel
Page 2 
19
PART 3  RECURSIVE INVERSION  THEORY
mmmm'
,
'
Part 3  Recurstve Inversion  Theory
_
Page 3 
ntroducton
to SeJsmic Znversion Methods
Brian Russell
PART 3  RECURSIVE INVERSION  THEORY
3.1
Discrete
,
Inversion
,
In section 2.2, we saw that reflectivity
was defined in terms of
acoustic impedancechanges. The formula was written:
Yi+lV+l
' iV! 2i+1' Zi
riyoi'+lVi+l+
YiViZi..+l
+ Zi
where
r  refl ecti on coefficient,
/0 density,
V  compressional velocity,
Z  acoustic impedance,
and
Layer i overlies Layer i+1.
If we have the true reflectivity
available to us, it is possible to
recover the a.coustic impedanceby inverting the above formula. Normally, the
inverse' formulation is simply written down,but here we will supply the
missing steps for completness. First,
notice that:
Zi+l+Zi
Zi+1 Zt
2 Zi+1
Zi+l+Zi
Zi+1 Zi
2 Zf[
Zi+l+ Zi
Zi+l+Zi
Zi+l+Zi
I +ri Zi+l
+Zi + Zi+l
+2i
Zi+l
+Zi
Also
I
ri
Ther'efore
Zi+l
Zi
l+r.
ill,
Part 3  RecursiveInversion Theory
Page
Introduction to Seismic InversonMethods
Brian Russell
pve
TIME
(sec]
0.7
REFLECTION
COEFFICIENT
SERIES
Fig.
Part
3.1,
RECOVERED
ACOUSTIC
IMPEDANCE
Applying
the recursiveinversionformulato a
simple,and exact, reflectivity.
3  Recursive
Inversion  Theory
Page 3 
!ntroductt
9r
on to Se1 smJc ! nversi on Methods
; ; 
9rgrtk'k9r9r ; ;
Or, the final
Brian
Russell
.................................................
esult
l+r i
Zi+[=Z
This is called
the discrete
recursive
inversion
formula and is the basis
of many current inversion techniques. The formula tells us that if we know
the acoustic impedanceof a particular layer and the reflection coefficient at
the base of that layer, we may recover the acoustic impedance of the next
layer. Of course we need an estimate of the first layer impedanceto start us
off.
Assumewe can estimate this value for layer one. Then
l+rl
Z2:
Zli r1
Z3=
Z2 11
+r2

To find the nth impedancefrom the first,
Figure
reflection
3.1
shows the
coefficients
application
derived
in
and so on ...
we simply write the formula as
of the
section
recursive
2.2.
formula to
As expected,
the
the full
acoustic impedance was recovered.
Problems
encountered
When the
with
real
i
data
!
recursive inversion formula is applied to real data,
that two serious problems are encountered.
we find
These problems are as follows
(i) FrequencyBandlimi ti ng
_
Referring back to Figure 2.2
bandlimited
when
it
we see that
is convolved
with
the reflectivity
the seismic
wavelet.
is severely
Both
the
low frequency componentsand the high frequency componentsare lost.
Part 3  Recursive Inversion
 Theory
Page 3 
"
Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods
0.2
Brian Russell
V) 'V,
Vo:1000
m
Where:
{ASSUME
j: l)
 V,= 1000 io.t
R = +0.2
 1500 ec'.
m
(a)
 0.1
'0.2
R
R=
Vo=1000m
= 818ii.m
R=0.1 '+ 1
R =+0.2
R: 0.1
Figure 3.2 Effect of banUlimitingon reflectivity,
single reflection coefficient,
where(a) shows
anU (b) showsbandlimited
refl ecti on coefficient.
I
__
___
Part 3  Recursire Inversion  Theory
Page 3 
Introduction
to Seismic
(ii)
Noise
The
inclusion
Inversion
of coherent
makethe estimate reflectivity
Methods
or random noise
let
us first
into
the seismic
Russell
'trace
will
deviate from the true reflectivity.
To get a feeling for the severity
inversion,
Brian
of
the above limitations
use simple models. To illustrate
on recursire
the
effect
of
bandlimiting, consider Figure 3.Z. It shows the inversion of a single spike
(Figure 3.2 (a)) anUthe inversion of this spike convolved with a Ricker
wavelet (Figure 3.2 (b)).
Even with this very high frequency banUwidth
wavelet, we have totally lost our abil.ity to recover the low frequency
componentof the acoustic impedance.
In Figure 3.3 the model derived in
minimumphase wavelet.
section Z.2 has been convolved with a
Notice that the inversion of the data again shows a
loss of the low frequency component. The loss of the low frequency component
is the most severe problem facing us in the inversion of seismic data, for
is extremely
Oifficult
to
directly
recover
spectrum, we may recover muchof
the
it.
original
At
the
it
high end of the
frequency content using
deconvolution techniques. In part 5 we will address the problem of recovering
the low frequency component.
Next,
consider
sources, but will
reflectivity.
reflection train
the
problem of noise.
always tend
to
interfere
This noise
with
our
may be from many
recovery of the true
Figure 3.4 showsthe effect of adding the full
(including
multiple
transmission losses) to the model reflectivity.
As we can see on the diagram, the recovered acoustic impedancehas the
basic shape as the true acoustic impedance, but becomesincreasingly
same
incorrect
with depth. This problemof accumulatingerror is compoundeU
by the amplitude
problemnsintroduced by the transmission losses.
Part 3  Recurslye Inversion  Theory
Page 3 
Introduction
to Seismic Invers,ion Methods
Brian Russell
pv,
TIME
0.?
REFLECTION
COEFFICIENT
SERIES
Fig.
3.3.
RECOVERED
ACOUSTIC
IMPEDANCE
The effect
SYNTHETIC
INVERSION
(MWNUMPHASE
WAVELET)
OF SYNTHETIC
of bandlimiting on recurslye inversion.
TIME
TIME
(see)
(re.c)
0.7
REFLECTION
COEFFICIENT
SERIES
Fig.
Part 3  Recursive
3.4.
RECOVERED
ACOUSTIC
IMPEDANCE
The effect
Inversion
 Theory
R.C.S.
WITH ALL
MULTIPLES
of noise on recursive
RECOVERED
ACOUSTIC
IMPEDANCE
inversion.
Page 3 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
3.3 Continuous
Brian Russell
Inversion
A logarithmic
relationship
is
often used to
approximate the above
formulas. This is derived by noting that we can write r(t)
function in the following way:
as a continuous
r(t)  Z(t+dt)
Z(t+dt)+ Z{t)
_ 1 d Z(t)
Z()  ' z'(t)
Or
! d In Z(t)
r(t) =
The inverse
formula
dt
is
thust
Z(t)=Z(O)
exp
2y r(t)dt.
0
The precedingapproximation
is valid if
case.
r(t) <10.3 which is usually the
A paper by Berteussen and Ursin (1983), goes into muchmore detail
the continuous versus discrete approximation.
Figures 3.5 and 3.6 from their
paper showthat the accuracy of the continuous inversion algorithm is
4% of the correct value between reflection
If
on
coefficients
within
of 0.5 and +0.3.
our reflection coefficients are in the order of + or  0.1, an even
simplerapproximation
maybe made
by dropp'ing
the logarithmicrelationship:
t
1d
Z(t)_==
Z(t)2'Z(O)
fr(t) dt
r(t)
dr
VO
Part 3  Recursive Inversion  Theory
Page 3 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
,,
,m
I +gt
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
Fig. 3.5
Brian Russell
xp
(26)
IIIII
Difference
0.0
0.05
0.11
0.18
0.25
0.33
0.43
0.
0.667
0.8182
1.0
1.222
1.500
1.86
0.14
0. I?
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.37
0.45
0.5
0.670
0.8187
1.0
1.221
1.492
1.82
0.14
0.12
0.09
0.07
0.05
0.04
'
0.02
0.01
0.003
0.0005
0.0
0.001
0.008
0.04
0.4
0.5
2.33
3.0
2.23
2.7
o.1
0.3
0.6
4.0
3.3
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
5.7
9.0
19.0
co
4.1
5.0
6.0
7.4
1.6
4.0
13.0
o
Numericalcpari son of discrete and continuous
i nversi
on.
(Berteussen and Ursin, 1983)
$000
}m
MPEDANCE
(O
ISCR.
) rniL
O
${300
O
IFFERENCE
o
SO0
OI FFERENCE( SCALEDUP)
T 'E
Fig. 3.6
t SECONOS
Cparisonbetween
impedance
cputatins basedona
discrete and a continuousseismic del.
(Berteussenand Ursin, 1983)
Part 3  Recursire .Inversion  Theory
Page 3 
Introduction'to
Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
PART 4  SEISMIC PROCESSINGCONSIDERATIONS
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
Page 4 
ntroduction
4.1
to Seismic nverson Methods
B.r.ian Russell
Introduction
Havinglookedat a simple model'of the seismic trace, anu at the
recursire inversion alogorithmin theory, we will nowlook at the problem of
processingreal seismiceata in order to get the best results fromseismic
inversion. We may group the key processingproblemsinto the following
categories:
( i ) Amp
1i tu de recovery.
(i i) Vertical
resolution
improvement.
(i i i ) Horizontal resol uti on improvement.
(iv)
Noise elimination.
Amplitudeproblemsare a majorconsiderationat the early processing
stagesandwewill look at both deterministicamplitude
recoveryandsurface
consistent
residual static time corrections.
Vertical resolution improvement
will involve a discussion of aleconvolution and wavelet processing techniques.
In
our discussion of horizontal resolution we will look at
the resolution
improvement
obtained in migration, using a 3D example.Finally, wewill
consider several approaches
to noiseelimination, especially the elimination
of multi pl es.
Simply stateu, to invert our seismic data we usually assume the
And to arrive at an
onedimensional model given in the previous section.
approximationof this model (that is, that each trace is a vertical,
bandlimited reflectivity
function) we must carefully process our data with
these
considerations in minU. Figure 4.1 showsa processing flow which could
be useUto do preinversion processing.
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
Page 4 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
INPUT RAW DATA
DETERMINISTIC
AMPLITUDE
CORRECTIONS
,.
SURFACECONSI STENT
AMPt:ITUDE ANAL'YSIS
_m
mlm
SURFACECONS ISTENT
DECONVOLUTIO,
NFOLLOWED
BY HI GH RESOIJUTI.ON DECON
i
SURFACECONSISTENT
STATI CS ANAIJYSIS
VELOCITY ANAUYSIS
APPbY STATICS AND VEUOCITY
MULTIPLE
ATTENUATION
STACK
MI GRATI ON
,
Fig.
ll
'
Simpl
i fiedi nversi
onprocessing
flow.
4.1.
11
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations

,11
Page 4 
Inl;roducl:ion 1:oSeJsmlc Invers1on Nethods
4.2
BrJan Russell
Am.p'l
i tu.de..P,.ecovery
The most dJffJcult job in the pocessing of any seismic line
is
econstuctingthe amplJtudes
of the selsmJc
taces as they wouldhavebeenJf
thee
were no dJs[urbJnginf'luences present.
We normally make the
simplJficationthat the distortionof the seJsmic
amplJtudes
maybe put into
three main categories'spheJcaldivergence, absorptJon,and tansmJssion
loss.
Based on a consideration of
these three factors, we maywrJte aownan
approximatefunctJonfor the total earth attenuation
At: AO*
(b
/ t) * exp(at),
where
anU
Thus, if
data,
formula.
the
= time,
At = recorded
amplitude,
A0 = true ampl
i tude,
a,b
= constants.
we estimate the constants in the above equation from the seismic
true amplitudesof the data coulUbe recoveredby using the inverse
The deterministic
amplitude correction and trace
to
trace
mean
scaling will accountfor the overall gross changesin amplitude. However,
there may still be subtle (or even notsosubtle) amplitude problems
associatedwith poorsurface conditions or other factors. To compensate
for
these effects, it is often advisable to computeand apply surfaceconsistent
gain corrections. This correction involves computing
a total gain value for
each trace and then decomposing
this single value in the four components
Aij=
SixRjxG
kxMkX
j,
where A = Total amplitude factor,
M = Offset
component,
S = Shot component,
X = Offset
distance,
R:
i,j
Receiver
component,
G = CDP component, and
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
= shot,receiver
pos.,
k = CDP position.
Page 4 
Introduction to Seismic .Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
SURFACE
SUEF'A
AND
CONSIb'TEh[O{
T tVE :
,RiLrER
Fig.
4.2.
Surface and subsurface geometryand
surfaceconsistent decomposition. (Mike Graul).
,
Part 4  SeismicProcessing
Considerations
Page 4 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Figure 4.g
Brian Russell
(from Mike Graul's unpublished course notes) shows the
geometryusedfor this analysis. Notice that the surfaceconsistent
statics
anti aleconvolutionproblemare similar. For the statics problem,the averaging
can be 1oneby straight summation.For the amplitude problemwemust
transform the above equation into additive form using the logarithm:
InAij=
InSi +InRj+InGk+lnkMijX.
The
problem can then be treated exactly the same way as in the
statics
case. Figure 4.3, fromTaner anti Koehler (1981), showsthe effect of doing
surface consistent amplitude and statics corrections.
4.3 Imp.
rov.
ement_
o.[_Ver.
t.i.ca.1..Resoluti
on
Deconvolution
is
process by which an attempt is made to
seismic wavelet from the seismic trace,
remove the
leaving an estimate of reflectivity.
Let us first discussthe "convolution"part of "deconvolution" starting with
the equation for the convolutional model
stwt* r t
st= the seismictrace,
where
wt= the seismicwavelet,
rt= reflection coefficient series,
* = convolution operation.
In
the
frequency domain
S(f)
The
procedure
reflection
deconvol ution
and consists
coefficients.
W(f) x R(f)
process
of
is
simply the
reverse
of the convolution
"removing" the wavelet shape to
reveal
the
We must design an operator to do this, as in the
fol 1owlng equati on
rt: st* o
whereOroperator inverseof wt .
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
,
Page 4 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
ii
Brian
Russell
11
1'
ii
'..,' ,
,"
"
"
d.
Preliminary
stack
bet'ore
surface
consistent
static
andomplilude corrections.
Fig.
4.3.
Stacks with and without
Stockwith surfaceconsistent
staticand amplitudecorrections.
surfaceconsi stent
corrections. (TaneranuKoehler,1981).
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
Page4  7
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
In the frequency domain,this becomes
R(f) = W(f) x 1/W(f) .
After this extremely simple introduction, it
may appear that the
deconvolutionproblemshouldbe easy to solve. This is not the case, and the
continuing research into the problem testifies to this. There are two main
problems. Is our convolutionalmodelcorrect, and, if the modelis correct,
can we derive the
true
wavelet
from the
data?
The
answer to the first
questionis that the convolutionalmodelappearsto be the best modelwe have
comeup with so far. The main problem is in assuming
that the wavelet does
not vary with time. In our discussionwe will assumethat the time varying
problemis negligible within the zoneof interest.
The secondproblemis much more severe, since it requires solving the
ambiguousproblemof separatinga wavelet and reflectivity sequencewhenonly
the seismic trace is known. To get around this problem, all deconvolution or
wavelet estimation programsmakecertain restrictive assumptions,either about
the wavelet or
the
reflectivity.
There are
methods: those which make restrictive
two classes of deconvolution
phase assumptions and can be considered
,
true wavelet processingtechniquesonly whenthese phaseassumptionsare met,
and those
which do not
make restrictive
phase assumptions and can be
consideredas true wavelet processingmethods. In the first category are
(1) Spiking deconvolution,
(2) Predictive
deconvolution,
(3) Zero phase deconvolution, and
(4) Surfaceconsi stent deconvoluti on.
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
Page 4 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
(a)
Fig.
A comparison of non surfaceconsistent and surfaceconsistent
decon on prestack data. {a) Zerophase deconvolution.
{b) Surfaceconsistent soikinB dconvolution.
4.4
(b),
Fig. 4.5
Surfaceconsistent decon comparisonafter stack.
(a) Zerophase aleconvolution. (b) Surfaceconsistent
deconvol ution.
''
,t
_ _
,,
Part 4  .Seismic
Processing
Consioerations
,_
Page4 
Introduction
to Seismic Invers.ion Methods
Brian Russell
In the second category are found
(1) Wavelet estimation using a well 1og (Strat Decon).
(Hampson
and Galbraith 1981)
(2) Maximum1ikel ihood aleconvolution.
(Chi et al,
Let
us
illustrate
the
lg84)
effectiveness
surfaceconsi
stent
aleconvolution.
surfaceconsi
stent
scheme involves
components.
di recti
ons
must therefore
We
common
con,non offset
Referring
the
of
one
of.
to Figure 4.,
convolutional
average
source, commonreceiver,
over
four
notice
proauct
different
ways to perform it.
that
of four
geometry
common depth point (CDP), and
(COS). The averaging must be performed iteratively
are several different
the methods,
and there
The example in Figures 4.4 ana 4.5
shows an actual surfaceconsi stent case study which was aone in the following
way'
(a) Computethe autocorrelations
of each trace,
(b) average the autocorrelations in each geometry eirection to get four
average autocorrel ati OhS,
(c) derive and apply the minimumphase
inverse of each waveform, and
() iterate through this procedure to get an optimumresult.
Two points to note
when you are
looking
at
the
case study are the
consistent definition of the waveform
in the surfaceconsistentapproachan
the subsequent improvementof the stratigraphic
interpretability
We can compareall of the above techniques
page.
of the stack.
using Table 41 on the next
The two major facets of the techniques which will
be comparedare
the
wavelet estimation procedure and the wavelet shaping procedure.
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
Page 4 
10
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Table
41
Comparison of Deconvolution MethoUs
m
METHOD
Spiking
Brian Russell
WAVELET ESTIMATION
WAVELETSHAPING
Min.imum
phase assumption
Randomrefl ecti vi ty
Ideally shapedto spike.
In practice, shapedto minimum
assumptions.
phase,higherfrequencyoutput.
Predi cti ve
No assumptions about
Does not whiten data well.
Deconvol uti on
wavelet
Removes
short andlong period
Deconvol ution
multiples.
Does not affect
phaseof wayelet for long lags.
..1_,
Zero
Phase
Deconvol utton
Zero phaseassumption.
Randomrefl ectt vi ty
Amplitude spectrumi$
assumption.
whi tened.
Phase is not altered.
Canshapeto desired output.
Surfacecons.
Deconvolution
Minimumor zero phase.
Randomreflecti vi ty
Ampli rude spectrum i s
assumption.
whitenedless than in single
Phasecharacteri s improved.
trace
methods.
Stratigraphic
No phase assumption.
Phase of wavelet is zeroed.
Deconvol ution
However, well must match
Amplitude
spectrum
not
sei smi c.
whi tened.
Maximum
No phase assumption.
Phase of wavelet is zeroed
L ik el i hood
Sparsespike assumption.
Amp
1i rude spectrumi s
deconvol ution
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
whi tened.
Page 4
11'
Introduction
4.4
to Seismic
Lateral
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
Resol uti on
The complete threedimensional (3D) diffraction problemis shownin
Figure 4.6 for a modelstudy taken fromHerman,et al (1982). Wewill look'at
line 108, which cuts obliquely across a fault and also cuts across a reeflike
structure.
Note that
it misses the second reef
structure.
Figure 4.7 shows the result of processing the line.
In the stacked
section we maydistinguish two types of diffractions, or lateral events which
do not represent true geology.
The first
type are due to point reflectors
the plane of the section, and include the
corners at the base of the reef structure
secondtype are outofteplane
in
sides of the fault and the sharp
which was crossed by the line.
diffractions,
The
often called "sideswipe". This
is most noticeable by the appearance of energy from the second reef booy which
was not crossed. In the twodimensional (2D) migration, we have correctly
removed
the
2D
outoftheplane
problems.
diffraction
diffractions.
The final
patterns,
but
are
The full
3D
migration
migrated section has also
still
bothere
the
corrects for these
accounted for
positioned evehts such as the obliquely dipping fault.
by
incorrectly
This brief summaryhas
not been intended as a complete summaryof the migration procedure, but rather
as a warning that
structural
migration {preferably 3D) mustbe performedon complex
lines for the fol 1 owing reasons:
(a)
To correctly position dipping events on the seismic section, and
(b)
To remove
diffracted
Although migration
events.
can compensatefor someof the
lateral
resolution
problems, we must rememberthat this is analogous to the aleconvolution problem
in that not all of the interfering
be aware that the
interference,
true
effects may be removed. Therefore, we must
onedimensional
seismic trace,
free of any lateral
is impossible to achieve.
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
Page 4 
12
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
71
lol
I
131
101
131
(a] 3
108
D MODEL
..................................
LINE
.............................
.........................................
....................................
{hi 880
Fig.
i
4.6.
LAYOU
3D model experiment.
mm
ml
(Herman
et al, 1982).
mm
Part 4 Seismic Processing Considerations
Page 4 
13
Introduction
4.5
Notse
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Attenuation
As we' discussed in an earlier
either
Brian Russell
andom 'or coherent.
section, seismic noise can be classified
Random noise
is
as
reduced by the stacking process
quite well unlessthe signaltonoise ratio dropsclose to one. In this case,
a coherencyenhancement
programcan be used, which usually involves sometype
of trace mixing or FK filtering.
However,the interpreter mustbe aware that
any mixing of the data will "smear" trace amplitudes, makingthe inversion
result on a particular trace less reliable.
Coherent
noise
is much more difficult
sources of coherent noise is multiple
Two of
to eliminate.
One of
major
interference, explained in section 2.4.
the major methodsused in the elimination of multiples
filtering
the
are
the FK
method,and the newerInverse Velocity Stacking method. The Inverse
VeiocityStackingmethod
involvesthe followingsteps:
(1) Correct the data using the proper NMOvelocity,
(2) Model the data as a linear
sumof parabolic shapes,
(This involves transforming to the Velocity domain),
(3) Filter outthe parabolic
components
with a moveout
greaterthansome
predetermined
limit (in the order of 30 msec),and
(4) Perform the inverse transform.
Figure 4.8, taken from Hampson
(1986), showsa comparisonbetweenthe two
methodsfor a typical multiple problemin northernAlberta. The displays are
all' coon offset stacks.
Notice
that
although both methods have performed
well on the outside traces, the Inverse Velocity Stacking methodworks best on
the inside traces. Figure4.9, also fromHampson
(1986), showsa comparison
of
final
stacks with and without multiple attenuation.
It is obvious 'from this
comparison
that the result of inverting the section whichhas not had multiple
attenuation
would be to introduce spurious velocities
into the solution.
The
importanceof multiple elimination to the preprocessingflow cannot therefore
be overemphasized.
Part 4  Seismic Processing Consideration
,=m__
Page 
14
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell.
!lilt
tiiti
ll!1111iitt
i)tt
iltli
ii/lit
tttl
ill
(b] LINEld8  2D MIGRATION
IIIIIIll!!1111111111111it
I!1111111
I!11111111111illl
illIiIIIIIIIIIil!111111tllilil!illlllll!111illlll
[1111111111111111111111111
III!!1111
I!111111111111111
IIIIIIIilllllllll!111111111111111111111
?111[i
IIIIIIIII
!1111111111111111
IIII!IIIiillilllllillllllllllliillllllllllllh
.,
}!l!iilll
lllllilllllll
i!iiJ
:illllllllllllilitiilillit!illllll
,o
111lllllllllllllllllllll1111llllll
Iilllllll!ll!llll
I111
illllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllii{lilllllllllllll
"fillllllllll!1111illi!111
IIIIIIIII
IIIIIII1111111111
IIIIIlillilllllll!1111!1!111111111
'
Col LINE 108  3D MIGRATION
Fg. 4.7. Migrationof modeldata shown
in Fg. 4.6.
 (Hermanet al, 1982).
Part 4  Seismic ProcessingConsiderations
Page 4 
15
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
AFTER
AFTER
FK MULTIPLE
INVERSE VELOCITY STACK
MULTIPLE ATTENUATION
INPUT
Russell
ATTENUATION
J. '
"
' ')'%':!!t!'!11!1'1
';.m,:'!:',./l r'm
"';;:.m;: .... ,;lliml;..
all
m#l
Fig, 4.8.
Commonoffset
stacks
calculated
from data before multiple
attenuation,
after inverse velocity
and after FK multiple attenuation.
stack multiple attenuation,
(Hampson, 1986)
888
Zone d
Interest
1698
4
Secondrealdataset conventional
stackwithout
multiple
attenuation.
'", ......
,,t./:,.t.,.
lee
,ii%' .t
';'
"" ""
).
;,<,:u(:'J,.J
L,..,!I',,',
,'; ,
,
, ,
.% '.
' "'
"'"t"
1%';J
'
'
,,,,
I ,,,,,..... '1"' ',''...;t(' ,)",'.m,,"".
,,, ';
t,
..'t,..'"'i'
.... ....
; '".' ,..'....
'. 2>.': '..', ;,%"'1
'" "'
Zone of
,,, .tiill).);l',"P,')'"'".r'"mm"""P"
")r'"
,,..,.,,..,,,_.
,,.,.....,...,..,...,..,...,....,,,.,.,..
gt'
..,,,. ' '"  ..... ,
Interest
.. ,,,
,,p}h?.,.,,
r.,.
.}.U.,..,
,nm,
";'
........
,,,,
../.
,.', .'%....
,'......._
,,,,.,.,,,,,..,
.l,
), .,
' ,,{.
,,m,l,,
.''
','...r'
....
'.""::"''""""="'"""
Fig. 4.9.
Second real data stack after inverse velocity
multiple attenuation.
(Hampson, 1986)
Part 4  Seismic Processing Considerations
stack
Page 4 
16
Introduction
to Seismic Inverslon
Methods
Brian Russell
PART 5  RECURSIVE INVERSION  PRACTICE
_
Part
5  Recursive
Inversion
 Practice
..
Page 5 
Introduction
5.1
to Seismic
The Recurslye
Inversion
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
Method
We have nowreached a point
where we may start aiscussing the various
algorithms currently usedto invert seismicdata. Wemustremember
that all
these techniquesare baseUon the assumptionof a oneaimensionalseismic
trace model. Tat is, we assumethat all the corrections which were aiscussed
in section 4 have been correctly applied, leaving us with a seismic section in
whic each trace represents a vertical, bandlimiteU reflectivity
this section we will
series.
In
look at someof the problems inherent in this assumption.
The most popular techniquecurrently used to invert seismic Uata is
referred
to as recursire
inversion
and goes under such trade
names as SEISLOGana
VERILOG. The basic equations used are given in part 2, anU can be written
Zi+
1 Zi
riZi+l+
Zi
where
and
The seismic data are
<===__===>
Zi+l
=Zi
LIJ
r i = ith reflection
coefficient,
Zi /Vi= density
x velocity.
simply assumeato fit
the forward model and is
inverted usingthe inverse relationship. However,as wasshownin section 3,
one of te key problemsin the recursire inversion of seismic data is the loss
of the lowfrequency component. Figure 5.1 shows an exampleof an input
seismic
section
aria the
resulting pseuaoacoustic impeaance without
the
incorporationof low frequency information. Notice that it resemblesa
phaseshifteU version of the seismicata. The questionof introUuclng the
low frequencycomponent
involvestwo separateissues. First, wheredo we get
the lowfrequency
component
from, ana, second,howao we incorporateit?
Part
5  Recurslye
Inversion
 Practice
Page 5 
2.
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
1171121e9leS1ol 92 93
i'11
I I Ittltl
=::::::::::lll[l1111t
' 1tlllttllltl
Illl1t1 l!IIit!
'ti! llltfltll!!l
I I !1!tn'il, ,
"
''
'
.
,
'
. .
.,.,
4
,,
.... _.
f .
............
.........
::=
,
., ,l,,..,,,
,,, ..,, ,,,,.,,
,,,I,....,
.......
.,,
. ....
.,%.
' .,, ,.,....
i .......
.......
,;.
.,
..,
..... .......,
.,.,,,,..,..,
,,,.,,..
.....,
.,.............
. '2
q, ,,
,..
J.I .,,,
.,
.......
: .......
:,.. . , . ,'..
....
,',:''
....2Y'
___ ....
.. ,.

.......
...
 ]
,',,..,
,v,
:,..l.;..'..ll;ql
.n....................
...;'.
;....:
',J',
.. ,
...................
''',,:'l,fm;
,' ,,,'
',',,
",,','",','
":''"m
iq't''a
....:.,
,],'
.' '  '""W',
. ,'.
:, m,'.
lJ ":!
 (
,,
 ,,.....,'.;.',,..
.........
7*
. :ci
'
':; , /....................
. ....
(( .,(''":"'7
' . , .
x{
....
..................
m:''
,_
............
...................
':.,
......
.... ......... " 7'
"''
.... ; '_ ],;,' ; ',m'l
r'u'" $ .... ,......r ... <
 ' '' /."
,,,_
. ; .... ,.:...............
......
%=:
. ...
=". ....
' . .''q
7' ' '. '
.
". q
.....
...........
.... ,...........
.....
';u
,.,,.,,?'..%.,
*'dti',i
lll'i'/lt' i"'; :;tl,i21..l'*.'.'l,ii.''..,:b''?
?'' ;q .('''"",h/''}
''"' c'((''"..........
"
.....
"
'1 '
'
' '
.... ,
, '
'
.....
. _
'
"'I'iI
,,._.'.';'".
........
:: ::
......
'.
'. ,,,' ,,'<.,
,. ,, ,
(a) OriinalSeismic
Data. Heavylines indicatemajorreflectors.
N
'"
"
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.9
'I
10
!l
1.0
I 1
I
1.2
12
.I
.!
1.3
!.3
1 4
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.7
18
i
(b)
19
Recursiveinversion of data in (a).
Figure
Part 5  Recursive Inversion  Practice
5.1
(Galbraith and Millington, 1979)
Page 5 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Thelow frequencycomponent
can be foundin oneof three ways'
(1) From a filtered
sonic log
The sonic log is the best wayof derivinglowfrequency
information in
the vicinity of the well. However,
it suffers fromtwomainproblems'it is
usually stretched with respectto the seismicdata andit lacks.a lateral
component.
Theseproblems,
discussed
in GalbraithandMillington(1979), are
solved by using a stretching algorithm which stretches the sonic log
information to fit
the seismic data at selected control points.
(2) From seismic velocity
analysis
In this case, interval velocities are derived from the stacking velocity
functions along a seismicline usingDix' formula. The resulting function
will be quite noisyandit is advisable to do someformof twodimensional
filtering on them. In Figure 5.2(a), a 2D polynomialfit has beendone to
smoothout the function.
This final
set of
traces represents the filtered
interval velocity in the 010 Hz rangefor eachtrace and may be added
directly to the invertedseismictraces. Refer to rindseth (1979), for more
de ta i 1 s.
(3) Froma geological model
Using all
incorporated.
available sources, a
blocky geological model can be built
and
This is a timeconsuming method.
Part 5  Recursire Inversion  Practice
Page 5 
4.
Introduction
to Seismic InversiOn Methods
.
Brian Russell
70000
GOOO0
$0000
(pvl 4oooo
'/sgc
( b)
$oooo
ZOOO0
I0000
/ V..308
(PV)*
3460
,
(a)
i
Figure 5.2
VELocrrY SURFACE 2rid ORDERPOLYN
Frr
s mTZeH CUTFtT
tRussell and Lindseth,
Part 5  RecursiveInversion Practice
Page5 
1982).
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Second, the lowfrequency component
can be addedto the high frequency
component
by either adding reflectivity stage or the impedance
stage. In
section 2.3, it wasshownthat the continuousapproximationto the forwardand
inverse equations was given by
Inverse Equation
Forward Equati on
n Z(t)
r(t) =1 d 1dt

<::==> Z(t)
=Z(O)
exp
20r(t)dt.
Sincethe previoustransforms
are nonlinear(because
of the logarithm),
Galbraith and Millington (1979) suggestthat the addition of the lowfrequency
component
shouldbe madeat the reflectivity stage. In the SEISLOG
technique
they are addedat the velocity stage. However,
dueto other considerations,
this should not affect the result too much.
Of course, we are really interested in the seismic velocity rather than
the acoustic impedance.
Figure5.2(b), fromLindseth(lg79), shows
that an
approximatelinear relationship exists between velocity and acoustic
impedance, given by
V = 0.308 Z + 3460 ft/sec.
Notice
that
this
relationship
is good for carbonates and clastics and
poor for evaporitesand shouldtherefore be usedwith caution. A moreexact
relationship may be found by doing crossplots from a well close to the
prospect. However,
usinga similar relationshipwemayapproximately
extract
velocity information from the recoveredacoustic impedance.
Figure 5.3 showslow frequencyinformationderived from filtered
sonic
logs. The final pseudoacoustic
impedancelog is shownin Figure5.4
including the lowfrequency
component.Notice that the geologicalmarkersare
moreclearly visible on the final inverted section.
Part 5  Recurslye Inversion
 Practice
Page 5 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Figure 5.3
Methods
Brian Russell
LowFrequency
comDonent
derived from"st.reched:'sonic lo.
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.9
l.O
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.:)
1.4
1.4
1.5
I$
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.8
19
19
Figure 5.4
Final inversioncombininFigures 5.1(b) and 5.3.
Lines indicate major reflectors.
(Galbraith and Millington, 1979)
Part
5  Recursive
Inversion
 Practice
Page 5 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
In sugary,
Methods
Brian Russell
the recursive methodof seismic inversion may be given by the
fol 1owing flowchart'
INTRODUCE
LOW
FREQUENCIES
)
I.voDOCOc
ICORRECT
TO
PSEUDO
' VELOCITIES
CONVERT
TO
DEPTH
I
Recursi ve Inversion
,
Procedure
.,
A commonmethod of display used for inverted sections is to convert to
actual
interval
transit
times.
coloured according to a lithological
These transit
times are then contoured and
colour scheme. This is an effective way
of presentingthe information especially to those not totally familiar'with
normal
seismic
sections.
Part 5  Recursive Inversion
 Practice
Page 5 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
(a)
Methods
Brian Russell
Frequency
(e)
(b)
Fig.
(a) Frequency response of a theoretical
differentiator.
(b) Frequencyresponseof a theoretical integrator.
(Russell and Lindseth, !982 )
,m
Part
5 Recursire
Inversion
 Practice
,i
ml
Page 5 
Introduction
5.2
to Seismic
Inver.si.on
Methods
Brian
Russell
I nfor.marl
o.nI ?_Th.e.
Lo..w
.F.r.equ.e.
ncycompo..ne.
nt
The key factor which sets inverted data apart from normal seismic data is
the inclusion of the low frequency component,regardless of howthis component
is introduced. In this section we will look at the interpretational
advantages of introducing this component. The information in this section is
taken from a paper by Russell and Lindseth (1982).
We
start
by
assuming
reflectivityimpedance
the
extremely
simple
moael
for
the
relationship which was introduced in part 5.1. However,
we will neglect the logarithmic relationship of the more complete theory (this
is justifiea
for reflection coefficients less that 0.1), so tat
t
_1dZ(t)<=__==>
Z(t)
=2Z(O)j
0r(t)at'
r(t)  dt
If we consider a single harmonic component, we may derive the frequency
response of this tel ationship, which is
dejwt
dt
" jwejwt<===> . jwtdt= jw
eJWt
where
w
21Tf,
In words.,differentiation introducesa 6 riB/octaveslope from.the high
end of the spectrumto the low, and a +90 degree phase shift. Integration
introduces a 6 dB/octave slope from the low end to the high end,
and a 90
degree phase shift. Simpler still,
differentiation removeslow frequencies
and integration puts them in. Figure 5.5 illustrates these relationships.
But how aoes all this effect our geology? In
illustrated three basic geological models'
(1) Abrupt 1i thol ogi c change,
Figure 5,6 we have
(2) Transitional
lithologic
change, an
(3) Cyclical change.
Part
5  Recursire
Inversion
 Practice
Page 5 
10
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
(A)MAJORLITHOLOGIC
CHANGE
Brian Russell
(B)TRANSITIONAL LITHOLOGIC
CHANGE
Vl
I
i
I.
I
I
I
V1
I
i
I
V:V+KZ
(C)CYCLICALCHANGE
Fig.
Part
5.6.
5  Recursire
Threetypesof lithological models' (a) Major change,
(b) Transitional, (c) Cyclical. (Russell andLindseth, 1982).
Inversion
 Practice
Page 5
11
Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods
Brian Russell
Wemayillustrate the effect of inversiononthesethreecasesbylooking
at both seismic anUsonic log Uata. To showthe loss of high frequencyon the
sonic log, a simple filter
is used,andthe associated
phaseshift is not
introUuced.
To start with, considera major1ithologic boundary
as exempl
i lieu by the
Paleozoicunconformity
of Western Canada,a changefroma clastic sequence
to
a carbonate
sequence.Figure5.7 shows
that mostof the information
aboutthe
largestepin velocityis containeU
in theD10liz component
of the soniclog.
In Figure5.8, the seismicdataandfinal Uepthinversion
are shown.On the
seismic data, a major boundaryshowsup as simply a large reflection
coefficient, whereas,on the inversion, the large velocity step is shown.
RAWSONIC
FILTERED
SONICLOGS
VELOCITY FT/SEC
10000
1090HZ
OIOHZ
OCJOHZ
TIME
0.3
0.5
Fig. 5.7. Frequency
components
of a sonic
log.
(Russell and Lindset, 1982).
, , ,
[ I
Part 5  Recursire Inversion  Practice
Page 5 
12
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
o' .
(a)
.%;
DEPTH
SEISLOG
DEPTH
.....
lOP OF
"' . ""I:'ALEOZOIC
425'
(b)
Fig.
.....
Part
5.8.
_.........
5  Recursive
Major litholgical'change,
Saskatchewan example.
(a) Sesimic s_ection, (b) Inverted section.
_(R_qsell
....and Li,pqse_th,_!98_2)___
Inversion
 Practice
Page 5 
13
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
To illustrate
transitional
and cyclic
Brian Russell
change, a single examplewill be
used. Figure. 5.9 showsa soniclog from an offshore Tertiary basin,
illustrating the rampswhichshow a transitional velocity increase, and the
rapidly varyingcyclic sequences.
Noticethat the 010 Hzcomponent
contains
all the information about the ramps, but the cyclic sequenceis containedin
the 1050 Hz component.Onlythe Oc component
is lost from the cyclic
component
uponremovalof the low frequencies. Figure 5.10 illustrates the
samepoint usingthe original seismicdata andthe final depthinversion.
In summary,
the informationcontainedin the low frequencycomponentof
the soniclog is .lost in the seismic data. This includessuchgeological
information as the dc velocity component,large jumps in velocity, and linear
velocity ramps. If this informationcould be recoveredandincluUeaduring
the inversion process, it wouldintroducethis lost geological information.
Fig. 5.9. Soniclog showing
cyclic andtransitionalstrata.
(Russell
Part
5  Recurslye
Inversion
 Practice
and LinOseth, 1982)
Page 5 
14
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
SEISMIC SECTIONCYCUC & TRANSITIONAL STRATA
(a)
(b)
i
13500
Part
5  Recursive
Inversion
 Practice
Page 5 
15
Introduction
5.3
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Sei smical ly Derived Porosi ty

ILI
We have shownthat
seismic data may be quite
adequately inverted to
pseudovelocity (and hence pseudosonic)information i f our corrections and
assumptions are reasonable.
true
sonic log
Thus,
information
we may try to treat
and extract
the inverted
petrophysical
data
data as
from
it,
specifically porosity values. Angeleri and Carpi (1982) have tried just this,
with mixed results. The flow chart for their procedure is shown in Figure
5.11. In their chart, the Wyllie formula and shale correction are given by:
At
where
transit
time for fluid saturated rock,
Zstf= porefluid transittime,
btma:rockmatrixtransittime,
Vsh
= fractionalvolume
of shale,and
btsh: shaletransittime.
The derivation
of
porosity
control.
Figure 5.12 shows the
porosity
for
was tried on a line which had good well
plot
each of three wells.
from
the
seismic
well
log
Notice that the fit
clean sands and very poor in the dirty
information
of
sands.
section
only
porosity versus seismic
is reasonable in
the
Thus, we mayextract porosity
under
the
most
favourable
conditions, notably excellent well control and clean sand content.
Part 5  Recurslye Inversion  Practice
Page 5 
16
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
!ILI61C
.AT&'$[IS'MI
.AT&'
F ']w[tt
'ill
]
I"' ''' m.,,,
_,ml.111,l lit
[ ,gnu mill i' ill. Utl..I
%lOtOG
I IIITEIPllETATII
i
l!
WlltK
Fig.
' .
5.11. Porosity eval uati on flow diagram.
(AngeleriandCarpi, 1982).
,
WELL
__
ClII
"
PNIIVI
o.. OPt
,
e
WELL
,
I
.....
'
e
WELL
poeoItrv
I
e
,e
CPI
e
1.4
1.7
1.8,
1.9
Fig.
5.12. Porosity profiles from seismic data and borehole data.
Shalepercentage
is al so displayed. (Angel
eri andCarpi, 1982).
i
Part
5  Recursire
Inversion
 Practice
Page 5 
17
Introduction
to Sei stoic Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russel 1
PART 6  SPARSESPIKE INVERSION
{
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
......
6
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Me.thods
6.1
Brian Russell
Introduction
Thebasic theoryof maximum1
ikeli hooddeconvol
ution (MLD)wasdeveloped
by Dr. Jerry Mendeland his associatesat USCanUhasbeenwell publicised
(KormyloandMendel,1983;Chiet el, 1984). A paperby Hampson
and Russell
(1985) outlined a modification of maximumlikelihood
Ueconvolutionmelthod
,
which allowed the methodto be moreeasily applied to real seismic ata. One
of the conclusionsof that paper wasthat the methodcould be extenoedto use
the sparsereflectivity as the first step of a broadbandseismic inversion
technique.This technique,which will be termedmaximumlikelihood
seismic
inversion, is discussed later
You will
in these notes.
recall that our basic model of the seismic trace is
s(t) = w(t) * r(t) + n(t),
where
s(t)
: the seismic trace,
w(t) : a seismic wayelet,
Notice that the solution to the
there
r(t)
: earth reflectivity,
n(t)
= addi tire
above equation
are three unknownsto solve for.
and
noise.
is indeterminate,
However, using certain
since
assumptions,
the aleconvolution
problem can be solved. As we have seen, the recursire
method of seismic inversion is basedon classical aleconvolution techniques,
which assumea randomreflectivity
and a minimumor zerophase wavelet.
They
produce
a higherfrequency
waveleton output,but neverrecoverthe reflection
coefficient series completely. More recent aleconvolution
techniquesmaybe
groupedunder the categoryof sparsespike
meths. That is, they assumea
certain modelof the reflectivity
and make a wavelet estimate based on this
assumption.
Part 6  Sparsespike
Inversion
6
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
ACTUAL REFLECTIVITY
POISSONGAUSSIAN
I,:,
..
SERIES OF LARGE
EVENTS
F
GAUSSIAN
BACKGROUND
OF SMALL
SONICLOG
EVENTS
REFLECTIVITY
EXAMPLE
Figure 6.1 The fundamental
assumption
of the maximumlikelihood
method.
Part 6
Sparsespike Inversion
6
Intr6duction to Seismic Tnvetsion Methods
Brian Russell
These techniques include(1) btaximumLikel ihood deconvolutton
and inversion.
(2) L1 norm deconvolution and inversion.
(3) Minimumentropy deconvol
ution (MEO).
From the point of view of seismic inversion, sparsespike methods have an
advantage over classical methodsof deconvolutionbecause the sparsespike
estimate, with extra constraints,
the
reflectivity.
We
deconvolution, and will
will
MaximumLikelihood
i
focus
l!
Figure 6.1 illustrates
on
maximumlikelihood
the L1 normmethod of Dr.
Doug
and Inversion
MaximumLi kel i hood Deconvoluti
I
bandwidth estimate of
not be discussed in these notes.
Deconvolution
initially
then move on to
O1denburg. The MEDmethod will
6.2
can be used as a full
am
..
the
on
I
fundamental assumption of MaximumLikelihood
deconvolution, which is that the earth' s reflectivity
is composed
of a series
of large events superimposedon a Gaussian backgroundof smaller events.
This
contrasts with spiking decon, which assumesa perfectly randomdistribution
reflection
Figure
coefficients.
The real
soniclog
reflectivity
at the bottom of
6.1 shows that in fact this type of model is not at all
Geologically,
the
large
events
correspond to
of
unreasonable.
unconformities
and major
1i thol ogic boundaries.
From our assumptions about the model, we can derive an objective
function
whichmaybe minimizedto yield the "optimum"
or mostlikely reflectivity. and
wavelet
combination consistent with the statistical
assumption. Notice
this method gives us estimates of both the sparse reflectivity
,,
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
that
and wavelet.
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
INPUT
WAVELET
SPIKE SIZE'
SPl :
9.19
50.00
REFLECTIVITY
NOISE' 39.00
NOISE
OB,.ECTIVE'
98.19
Figure6.2(a) Objectivefunctionfor onePoSsible
solutionto inputtrace.
INPUT
WAVELET
SPIKE S!7_F: 6.38
SPIKE DENSIq', 70.85
REFLECTIVITY
NOISE: 81. 5
NOISE
OBJECTIVE:158.98
Objective
function
fora second
possible
solution
toinput
Figure 6.2(b)
trace. Thisvalueis higher
than6.2(a),.indicating
a less
1ikely solution.
,,
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
6
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
The objective function j is given by
k=l
 R2
N2
k=l
r(k)
where
 2mln(X)
= reflection
2(Lre)In(iA)
coeff.
at kth
sample,
m = numberof refl ecti OhS,
L : total numberof samples,
N : sqare root of noise variance,
n : noise at kth sample, and
= likelihood that a given
sample has a reflection.
Mathematically,
the
expected behavior
of
the
objective function is
expressed in terms of the parametersshownabove. No assumptions are made
aboutthe wavelet. The reflectivity sequenceis postulatedto be "sparse",
meaning that the expected numberof spies is governed by the parameter
lambda, the ratio of the expected numberof nonzer.
o spikes to the total number
of trace samples. Normally, lambda is a numbermuchsmaller than one. The
other parametersneededto describe the expected behavior are R, the RMSsize
of the large spies, andN, the RMSsize of te noise. With these parameters
specified,
any glven deconvolution sol ution
can be examined to see.whether it
is likely to be the result of a statistical processwith thoseparameters.For
example,if the reflectivity estimate has a number
of spikesmuchlarger than
the expectednumber,then it is an unlikely result.
In
simpler terms, we are looking for the solution
with
the minimum
number
of spikesin its reflectivity and te lowestnoisecomponent.Figures
6.2(a) and 6.2(b) showtwopossiblesolutionsfor the sameinput synthetic
trace. Noticethat the obje6tive functionfor the onewith the minimum
spike
structure
is indeed the lowest
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
value.
6
Introduction to Sei smic I nversi.on Methods
Bri an Russel1
Synthetic
Reflectivity
Original
I,
Model
I terati
,1.2.
ill.
.I
,i.
on I
I terati
on 2
Iteration
I teration
Iteration
Iteration
Iterati
on 7
Figure 6.3.
The Sinlle Most Likely Addition (SMLA)algorithm illustrated
for a simple reflectivity
Part 6  Sparsespi ke Inversion
model.
6
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russel1
Of course, there maybe an infinite numberof possible solutions, and it
would take too muchcomputertime to look at eachone.
mTherefore, a simpler
method is used to arrive at the answer. Essentially,
we start with an initial
wavelet estimate,es'timatethe sparsereflectivity, ' improve
the wavelet and
iterate through this sequence of steps until an acceptably low objective
function is reached. This is shownin block form in Figure 6.4. Thus, there
is a two step procedurehavingthe waveletestimate, updatethe reflectivity,
and then,
In
having the
reflectivity
estimate,
update the
wavelet.
These procedures are illustrated on model data in Figures 6.3 an 6.5.
Figure 6.3, the proceUure for upUating the reflectivity
is shown. It
consists of adding reflection
coefficients oneby one until an optimumset of
"sparse" coefficients hasbeenfound. Thealgorithmusedfor updatingthe
reflectivity
is callee the singlemostlikelyaddition
algorithm (SMLA)since
after each step it tries to find the optimumspike to add. Figure 6.5 shows
the procedure for updating the wavelet phase. The input model is shownat the
top of the figure, and the upated reflectivity and phaseis shownafter one,
two, five, and ten iterations.
Notice that the final result compares
favourably
with the model wavelet.
WAVELET
ESTIMATE
IMPROVE
ESTE
WAVELET
ESTIMATE
REFLECTIVITY
Fiure 6.4.
Theblockcomponent
method
of solvingfor both
reflectivity andwavelet. Iterate around
the
loop unti 1 converRence.
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
6
Introduction
to Seismic Invers.ion Methods
Wayel
et
Brian Russell
ReflectiVity '
Synthetic
INPUT
MOD
INITIAL
Ill
Fi ure 6.5.
,I ,
CUESS
TEN ITERATIONS
The procedure for updatin the wavelet
in the maximumlikelihood
Between each iteration
iter. ation on reflectivity
method.
above, a separate
(see Fiure 6.3)
has been done.
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
6
Introductionto SeismicInversionMethods
Figure 6.6
is
an exampleof the
Brian Russell
algorithm
applied
to a synthetic
seismogram. Notice that the major reflectors have been recovered fairly
and that the resultant trace matchesthe original trace quite accurately.
course, the
reflection
smaller
reflection
coefficient
coefficients
are
missing
well
Of
in the recovered
series.
Let us nowlook
Cretaceous gas play
at
in
comparison between the
some real data.
Southern Alberta.
input
anU
The first
example is a' basal
Figure 6.7(a) and (b) shows the
output
stack
from the
aleconvolution
procedure. Also shownare the extracted and final wavelet shapes. The main
things to note are the major increase in detail
(frequency content) seen in
the final stack, and the improvementin stratigraphic content.
Figure 6.8 is a comparisonof input and output stacks for a typical
Western
Canada basin seismic line.
The area is an event of interest
between
0.7 anU 0.8 seconds, representing a channel scour within the lower Cretaceous.
Although the scour is visible on both sections, a dramatic improvementis seen
in the resolution
of the infill
Within the central
of
this
channel
on the deconvolved section.
portion of the channel, a .positive reflection
lateral extent of five traces is clearly
with a
visible and is superimposed
on the
Uominant negative trough.
INPUT:
V.
,.: 
ESTIMATED:
ttl J':ll'j'
"'"
Figure 6.6
"
Synthetic
Part 6  Sparsespi ke Inversion
seismogram test.
6
10
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
'SONIC
SYNTHETIC
0.5
LOG
iZ.i
0.6
0.7
0.8
EXTRACTED
(a) Initial
WAVELET
seismicwith extracted wavelet.
0.5
0.6
0.8
(b)
Final deconvolved seismic with zeroplease wavelet.
....
Part 6
Figure
Sparsespike Inversion
_
6.7
__
._
11
Introduction
This
to Seismic
is
quite
Inversion
possibly
Methods
Brian
a clean channel sand and may or
Russell
may not be
prospective. However, this feature is entirely absent on the input stack.
Overlying the channel is a linear anomalywhich could represent the 'base of a
gas sand, and is muchmore sharply
lateral
and vertical
Finally
reflectivity.
reflections
This
is
the
shown in
deconvolved output
Figure 6.9.
both in a
the base of
the
are
present.
and estimated
the
Although some of the subtle
missing from this estimated reflectivity,
that all the main reflectors
clearly
on the output section,
sense.
we have taken
are
defined
It
is
there is no doubt
interesting
channel (at 0.7; seconds)and the
to note how
base of
the
6
12
postulated gas sand on top of the channel have been delineated.
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
INPUT
DECONVOLVED
STACK
STACK
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Figure 6.8
An input stack over a channelscour and
the resul ting deconvol
ved sei smic.
ESTIMATED
DECONVOLVED
REFLECTIVITY
STACK
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Figure 6.9
The deconvolved result from Figure 6.8
and its
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
estimated reflectivity.
13
Introduction
to Seismic
MaximumLikel
An
ihood
obvious
reflectivity
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
Inversion
extension
of
the
theory
to
invert
the
"blocky" impedancefrom
to Uevise a broadband or
data (Hampson
and Russell, 1985).
impedanceZ(i) maybe written
is
Given the reflectivity,
r(i),
es ti mated
the
seismic
the resul ting
Z(i)=Z(i_l
)[1+r(i)]
1  r(i)
Unfortunately,
from MLD produces
additive
noise.
'
of thi s formula to the reflectivity
application
res ults,
unsatisfactory
especially
this
estimate
spectrum.
the
presence of
Although the MLD algor itm'extrapol ares outsi de the bandwidth
of the wavelet to produce a broadband reflectivity
of
in
estimates
The result
degraaed by noi se at the
is
is
that
the
while
estimate, the reliability
low frequency
short
wavelength
end of
features
the
of the
impedancemay be properly reconstructed, the overall trenu is poorly resolvea.
This is equivalent to saying that the times of the spires on the reflectivity
estimate are better
of
resolved than their
amplituaes.
In order to stabilize the reflectivity
estimate, independent knowleUge
the impedancetrenU may be input as a constraint. Since r(i) < l, we can
derive
a convolutional
reflectivity,
type
equation
between
acoustic
impeUance anU
written
In Z(i)
= 2H(i) * r(i)
+ n(i),
where Z(i) = the knownimpedancetrend,
i <0
H(i)
i >0
and
n(i) : "errors" in the input trend.
Part 6  Sparsespike
Inversion
14
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Figure 6.10
Figure 6.11
Methods
Brian
Russell
Input Model parameters.
MaximumL
i kel i hood i nversi on result from Figure 6.10.
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
.m
__
6
lb
Introduction
The
to Seismic
Inversion
error series n(i)
'Methods
reflects
the fact
Brian
that the trend
Russell
information
is
approximate. We now have two measured timeseries:
the seismic trace, T(i),
and the
own wavelet
log
of
impedanceIn Z(i),
each with
its
and noise
parameters. The objective function is modified to contain two terms weighted
by their relative noise variances. Minimizing this function gives a solution
for r(i) whichattemptsa compromiseby simultaneouslymoUellingthe seismic
trace while
conformingto the knownimpedancetrend.
If
both the
seismic
noise and the impedance
trend noise are modelledas Gaussiansequences,their
respective variances become"tuning" parameterswhich the user can modify to
shift the point at which the compromise occurs. That is, at one extreme only
the seismicinformationis usedand at the oter extremeonly the impedance
trend.
In our first example,the methodis tested on a simple synthetic. Figure
6.10 showsthe sonic log, the derived reflectivity, the zerophase wavelet
used to generate
the
synthetic,
and finally
the
synthetic
itself.
This
example was usedinitially becauseit truly represents a "blocky" impedance
(and therefor.e a "sparse" reflectivity)
and therefore satisfies the basic
assumptions of the method.
In
Figure
6.11 the maximumlikelihood inversion result
is
shown.
In
this casewe haveuseda smoothedversion of the sonic velocities to provide
the constraint.
A visual
comparisonwoulU indicate
that
the extracteU
velocity profile corresponds very well to the input.
A moredetailed
comparisonof the two figures showsthat the original and extracted logs do
not matchperfectly. Tese small. shifts are due to slight amplitude problems
on the extracted reflectivity.
It is doubtful that a perfect match could ever
be obtai neU.
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
6
16
Introduction
to Seismic
Figure 6.12
Inversion
Creation of a seismic model from a soniclog.
Figure 6.13

......
ii__
Bri an Russel 1
Methods
Inversion result from Figure 6.12.

Part 6  Sparsespie Inversion
_!
mm
It_l
17
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Let us nowturn our attention to
Brian Russell
a slightly
more realistic
synthetic
example. Figure 6.12 showsthe applicationof this algorithmto a soniclog
derivedsynthetic. At the' top of the figure we see a sonic log with 'its
reflectivity
sequencebelow. (In this example,we have assumedthat the
density is constant, but this
is
not a necessary restriction.)
The
reflectivity wascbnvolved
with a zerophase
wavelet,bandlimitedfrom10 to
60 Hz, andthe final syntheticis shown
at the bottomof the figure.
The results
Figure 6.13.
of
The initial
the middle panel,
the maximumlikelihood inversion method are
log is shownat
sbown in
the top, the constraint is shownin
and the extracted resull is shownat the
bottom of
the
diagram. In this calculation, the waveletwasassumed
known. Notethe blocky
nature of the estimatedvelocity profile compared
with the actual sonic log
profile. Again, the input and output logs do not matchperfectly.
The fact that the two do not perfectly matchis due to slight errors in
the reflectivity sizes whichare amplified by the integration process,and is
partially the effect of the constaintused. Theconstraintshownin Figure
6.13 wascalculatedby applying a 200 ms smootherto the actual log. In
practice,
nearby well
this information could be derived from stacking velocities or from
control.
Part 6  Sparsespi ke Inversion
6
18
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
* !
Figure 6.14
An input seismic 1ine to be inverted.
'.
eel'?
e4dl
Figure 6.15
MaximumLiklihood reflectivity
estimate
from
seismic in Figure 6.14.
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
6
19
Introauction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Finally, we showthe results of the algorithm applied to real seismic
data. Figure 6.14 showsa portion of te input stack. Figure 6.15 showsthe
D extracted reflectivity.
Figure 6.16 shows the recoveredacoustic
impedance,wherea linear ramphas beenusedas the constraint. Notice that
the inverted section isplays a "blocky" character, indicating that the major
features of the impedance
log havebeen successfullyrecovered. This blocky
impedance
canbe contrastedwith the more traditional narrowband
.inversion
procedures, whichestimate a "smoothed"
or frequencylimited version of the
impedance.Finally, Figure 6.17 shows a comparison
betweenthe well itself
and the
inverted
section.
In summary,
maximumlikelihoodinversion is a procedurewhich extracts a
broadband estimate of the seismic reflectivity
and, by the introduction of
1inear constraints, al lows us to invert to an acoustic impedancesection which
retains the major geological features of boreholelog data.
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
6
20
Introduction to Seismic Inver.sion Methods
Figure 6.16
Brian Russell
Inversion of reflectivity shownin Figure 6.15.
SEISMIC INVERSION
WELL
Figure 6.17
SONIC
LOG
A comparison of the inverted seismic data and
the sonic log at well location.
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
..
21
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
6.3
Brian Russell
The L 1 Norm Method

__LI
Another method of recursive,
single trace inversion which uses a
"sparsespike"
assumption
is the L1 normmethod,
developed
primarilyby Dr.
DougOldenburgof UBC.
and Inverse Theory andApplications (ITA). This method
is also often referred to as the linear programming
method,and this can lead
to confusion. Actually, the two namesrefer to separateaspectsof the
method. Themathematical
modelusedin the construction
of the algorithm is
the minimizationof the L1 norm. However,the methodusedto solve the
problem is linear programming. The basic theory of this methodis found in a
paper by Oldenburg, et el (1983). The first part of the paper discussesthe
noi sefree convolutional model,
x(t) w(t) * r(t),
where x(t) = the seismictrace,
w(t) the wavelet, an
r(t)  the reflectivity.
The authors point out that if
highresolution
aleconvolution
is
performedon the seismictrace, the resulting estimateof the reflectivity can
be thought of as an averagedversion of the original reflectivity,
as shownat
the top of Figure6.18. This averaged
reflectivity is missingbothte high
andlow frequency
range,andis accurateonly in a bandlimiteacentral range
of frequencies. Although there are an infinite numberof ways in which the
missing frequencycomponentscan be supplied, Oldenburg, et al (1983) show
that
we can reduce this nonuniqueness by supplying more information
to
the
problem, such as the layered geological model
= 0 if t l
r(t),rj6(tl), where
j!
Part 6
Sparsespike
Inversion
=1 ift:
, an
.
6
22
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
0.0
T.IJdE(J
1m
.50
joo
j25
FR F.,O [HZJ
I
I
Figure 6.18
Part 6
Synthetic test of L1 NormInversion, moUified fro.q
Oldenburget al (1983). (a) Input impedance,
(b) Input reflectivity, (c) Spectrumof (b),
(d) Low frequencymodeltrace, (e) Deconvolutionof (),
(f) Spectrumof (U), (g) Estimatedimpedancefrom L1 Norm
method, () Estimated reflectivity,
(i) Spectrumof ().
Sparsespike Inversion
6
23
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
.le.thods
Brian
Russell
Mathematically, the previous equation is considered as the constraint to
the inversion problem. Now, the layered earth model equates to a "blocky"
impedancefunction, which in turn equates to a "sparsespiKe" reflectivity
function.
The
above constraint
will
thus
restrict
"sparse" structure so that
extremely fine
reflection
not be fully
coefficients,
will
our inverted
structure,
result
to
such as very small
inverted.
The other key difference in the linear programmingmethod is that the L1
norm is minimized
rather
than the L2 norm.
The L1 norm is defined
of the absolute values of the seismic trace.
is
as the
sum
TrueL2 norm, on the other hand,
defined as the square root of the sumof te squares of the seismic
trace
values. The two norms are shownbelow, applied to the trace x:
x1 :
xi
and
x2:
xi
i1
i:1
The fact that the L1 norm favours a "sparse" structure is shown in
following simple example. (Taken from the notes to Dr.
convention course'
"Inverse
seismograminversion").
theory with application
the
Oldenburg's1085 CSEG
to
aleconvolution and
Let f and g be two portions of seismic traces, where'
f: (1,1,0) and g : (0,%,0) .
The L2 norms are
therefore'
The L1 normsare given by'
fl  1 + 1 : 2
and gl =
Notice that the L1 norm of wavelet
is
'
smaller than the L1 norm of f,
whereas the L2 norms are both the same. Hence, minimizing the L1 norm would
reveal that g is a "preferred" seismic trace based on it's
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
sparseness.
6
24
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Input sei smic data
(a)
(b)
Estimated refl ec ti vi ty
(c)
Figure 6.19
Russell
Final
impedance
L1 14ormmetboOapplied to real seismic data,
(Walker and Ulrych, 1983)
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
6
25
Introduction to Seismic Inversion MethoUs
Brian Russell
Several other authors had previously consideredthe L1 normsolution in
deconvolution
(Claerboutand Muir, 1973, andTayloretal., 1979), however,
they considered
the problem
in the timedomain.Oldenburg
et al.w suggested
solving the problemusing frequencydomainconstraints. That is, the reliable
frequencyband is honored
whileat the same
timea sparsereflectivity is
created.
The results of their. algorithm on synthetic data are shownat the
bottom of Figure6.18. Theactual implementation
of the L1 algorithmto real
seismicdata has been done by Inverse Theory andApplications(ITA). The
processingflow or the linear programming
inversion methodis shownbelow.
InterPreter'=
CMPStacl<ed
section
<r(t)>=
r(t)w(t)
,i
I,,ico,ect,',
,o,'
Residu
Pm'm,e
o,w(t) I
i i
I Fourier
Trans
of<r
(t)> I
i
Scale
Data
Const.
mints.
From
$tackins_V'elocitles
I
Con,straints
From
'Well
Logs
I
ii &
Unear Programing Invemion
Assume
r(t) n;)(tq),isaspame,
reflection
series.
Minimize the sum of absolute reflection strengU.
FulFBand Reflectivity Series r (t)
Signal to Noise Enhancement and Display Preparation
Integration to Obtain Impedance Sections
Figure 6.19(b) The L1 Norm(Linear Programming.)
Method. (Oldenburg,1985).
Part 6
Sparsespike Inversion
6
26
Introduction
TSN
tO0
to Seismic Inver. s,ion Methods
90
80
70
60
Brian Russell
50
40
30
20
tO
1,2
1,3
1,4
1,5
1,6
1,7
1,:8
.2,0
22
Figure 6.20
Inputseismicdatasectionto L1Norm
inversion. (O1denburg, 1985'
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
6
27
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Figure 6.19 showsthe
Methods
application
Brian Russell
of
the above technique to an actual
seismic line from Alberta. The data consist of 49 traces with a sample rate
of 4 msecand a 1050 Hz bandwidth. The figure showsthe linear programming
reflectivity
and impedanceestimates below the input
should be pointed out that a three
the
final
results
in
both
seismic section.
It
trace spatial smootherhas been applied to
cases.
Finally, let us consider a dataset fromAlberta which has been processeU
through the LP inversion method. The input seismic is shownin Figure 6.2D
and the final inversion in Figure 6.21.
The constraints useU here were from
well
log
data.
In the final
superimposed on the final
inversion notice that the impedance has been
reflectivity
Part 6  Sparsespike Inversion
estimate using a grey level
scale.
6
28
Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods
Brian Russell
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
Figure 6.21
Part 6 Sparsespike
Reflectivity and greylevel plot of impedancefor
the L1 Norminversion of data in Figure 6.20.
Inversion
(O1denburg, 1985
6
29
Introduction
6.4
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Reef P roblee
Bran Russell
Onthe next fewpages 'is a comparisonbetweena recursiveinversion
procedure (Verilog) anda sparsespikeinversionmethod(MLD). The sequence
!
of pages includes the following:
 a sonic log and its derived reflecti vt ty,
 a synthetic seismogramat both polarities,
 the original seismic line, showingthe well location,
 the Verilog inversion,
 the MLD inversi
and
on.
BaseUon the these data handouts, do the following interpretation
exerc i se:
([) Tie the synthetic to the seismicline at SP76. (Hint use reverse
polari ty syntheti c).
(g) Identify and color the following events in the reef zone the Calmar shale (which overlies the Nisku shaly carbonate),
 the 1retort shale, and
 .the porous Leduc reef.
(3) Comparethe reefal events on the seismic and the two inversions. Use
a blocked off version of the sonic log.
(4) Determine for parallelism which section tells you the most about the
reef
Part 6
zone?
Sparsespike Inversion
6
30
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Rickel,
Phas
3g
26
Hz
Ns,
REFL.
COEF.
Brian Russell
DEPTH
lib
VELOCI
Eft,/sec.
...,
...,
...m
$11qPLE I HTI3tViILAliPLI IIi)E
Figure 6.22
Part 6
Sonic Log and synthetic
Sparsespike Inversion
2 Ns.
tiC. Ilql.  Sonic
Pei.ri es onlg
at the reef well.
6
31
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
.47
'49
5!
55
57
?!
'?
;'5
??
B5
$5
99
41
Part 6
Sparsespike
Inversion
32
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
***__********************************************************
0.7
Part 6
0.8
.la.El
Sparsespike Inversion
1 .:0
1.1
1..2
1. E)
6
33
Introduc%ion
0.?
[o Seismic
IB.G
Inversion
O.G
Meltotis
1.0
Brian
1.1
1.2
i i
i i
1.
eet I i e
I i
eI
Russell
1.4
ei l
e
25
27
31
$1
$?
67
?.1
?$
i
i
'111
113
119
123
127
I
131
I
.
137
IIIII
ii
iii
Part 6  Sparsespike
Inversio
i iiiiiiiiii
I1111111
ii
lee
IIII
..,
34
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
PART 7  INVERSION APPLIED TO THIN BEDS
Part 7  Inversion applied to Thin Beds
Page 7
Intro4uction
7.1
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
Thin Bed Analysis
One of the problemsthat we have identified in the inversion of seismic
traces is the loss of resolution caused by the convolution of the seismic
wavelet with the earth's reflectivity.
As the time separation between
reflection
coefficients
becomessmaller, the interference between overlapping
wavelets becomesmore severe.
effect
Indeed,
of reflection coefficients
in Figure 6.19 it was shownthat the
one sampleapart and of opposite sign is to
simply apply a phaseshift of 90 degrees to the wavelet. In fact, the effect
is
more of
a differentiation
of the wavelet,
which alters
the
amplitude
spectrumas wel1 as the phase spectrum. In this section we will look closer
at the effect
thin
of wavelets on thin
beds and how .effectively
we can invert
these
bed s.
The first
(1973).
comprehensivel'ook at thin bed effects was done by Widess
In this paper he used a model which has becomethe standard for
discussing thin beds, the wedgemodel. That is, consider a high velocity
laye6 encasedin a low velocity layer (or vice versa) and allow the thickness
of the layer to pinch out to zero. Next create the reflectivity responsefrom
the impedance,and convolvewith a wavelet. The thickness of the layer is
given in terms of twowaytime through the layer and is then related to the
dominantperiod of the wavelet. The usual wavelet used is a Ricker becauseof
the simpl i city of its shape.
Figure 7.1 is taken from Widess' paper and showsthe synthetic section as
the thickness of the layer
decreases
from twice
wavelet to 1/ZOth of the dominant period.
the dominant period of the
(Note that what is refertea to as a
wavelengthin his plot i s actually twice the dominantperiod). A few important
points can be noted from Figure 7.1.
First,
the wavelets start
interfering
with eackotherat a thicknessjust below two dominant
periods,but remain
Clistinguishable down to about one period.
Part 7  Inversion
applied
to Thin Beds
Page 7
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Figure 7.1
Effect
Russell
of bed thickness
on
reflection waveshape,where
(a) Thinbed model,
(b) Wavelet shapesat top
PIOPAGA! ION I NdC
ACnOSS TK arO)
.
and bottom re fl ectors,
').z _1
(c) Synthetic seismic
model, anU (d) Tuning
parameters
as measured
from
resul ting waveshape.
t
(C)
5O
(D)
2.0
,.
THINBEDREGIME
J PEAKTOTROUGH/
AMPLITUDE
0.8
1.0
<
0.4
/
0.4
, i
40
\
.
. .
20
40
MS
TWOWAY TRUE THICKNESS
(MILLISECONDS)
Figure 7.2
A typical detection and resolution chat used
to interpret bed thickness from zero phase seismic data.
('Hardage, 1986)
.
..
,,
Part 7  Inversion applied to Thin Beds
_
_ .....
Page 7
l.
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
Below a thicknessvalue of oneperiodthe waveletsStart merginginto a
single wavelet,
increase
and an amplitude increase
is
observe.
This
amplitude
is a maximumat 1/4 period, and decreases from this point down... The
amplitude is appraochingzero at
1/0
period, but note that the resulting
waveform is a gO degree phase shifted version of the original wavelet.
A more quantitative way to measurethis information is to plot the peak
to trough amplitude difference and i sochron across the thin bed. This is done
in Figure 7., taken from Hardage (1986). This diagram quantifies what has
already been
seen qualitatively
the
seimsic
section.
That
is
that the
amplitude is a maximumat a thickness of 1/4 the wavelet dominant period,
also that this is the lower isochron limit.
considered
to
obtain fully
be
the thin bed threshhold,
resolved reflection
and
Thus, 1/4 the dominant period is
below which it
is
difficult
to
coefficients.
7.2 In.versionCamparison
of T.hinBees
To test out this theory, a
using
both
recursire
thin
bed model was set up and was inverted
inversion and maximumlikelihood
impedance model is shown in Figure
7.3,
aleconvolution.
and displays a velocity
The
decrease in
the thin bed rather than an increase. This simply inverts the polarity of
Widess' diagram. Notice that the wedge starts at trace 1 with a time
thickness
sample.
of
100 msec and thins down to a thickness of 2 msec,.or
The resulting
synthetic
seismogram is shownin Figure 7.4.
.one
time
A 20 Hz
'Ricker wavelet was usedto create the synthetic. Since the dominant period
(T) of a 20 Hz Ricker is 50 msec,the wedge hasa thicknessof 2T at trace 1,
T at trace 25, T/2 at trace 37, etc.
Parl'7  'inverslYn'ap'plled 1oThin'Beds
.....
Page 7 '4
'
Introduction
to Seismic
12
Inversion
16
Methods
20
24
Brian
28
32
36
40
44
Russell
48
lOO
200
3OO
400
500
Figure7.3 True impedance
fromwedge
model.
lOO
200
.
300
400
500
Figure 7.4
Wedgemodel reflectivity
20 HZ Ricker
convol ved with
wavelet.
Part 7  Inversion applied to Thin BeUs
Page 7
Introduction
to Seismic
First,
the
Inversion
Methods
let us consider the effect
Brian
of
performing a recursire inversion on
wedgemodel. The inversion result is shownin Figure 7.5.
low frequency component
was not added into
better
show the effects
was also felt
little
of the initial
that the
information
with recursire
addition
inversion..
Note that the
the solution of Figure 7.5, to
recursire phase of the inversion.
of
to this test.
the
low frequency
the
thickness of
It
componentwould ado
Notice that there'are two major
First,
Russell
problems
the beU has only been
resolved downto about 25 msec, which is 1/2 of the dominantperiod. Remember,
that this is a twoway time,
has
been resolved
therefore
we say that the bed thickness itself
down to 12.5 msec,
or
1/4
period.
This
theoretical
resolution limit is the sameas that of Widess. Also, the top of the weUge
appears "pulledup" at the right side of the plot as the inversion has trouble
with the interfering
wavelets.
that there are actually
recursire
inversion
A second problem is that, although we know
only three distinct
has estimate
at
velocity
least
units in the section, the
seven
in the vertical
=irection.
This
result
is Uue to the banulimited
Uescriptively,
nature
of the Ricker
wavelet.
More
every wiggle on the section has been interpreted as a velocity.
Next,
consider
a maximumlikelihood inversion
constraint used was simply a
linear
ramp.
In
of
the
weOge.
The
this case, the shape of the
wedge has been much better
inversion.
That
is,
defined,
However, notice that
the maximumlikelihood
due to the broadband
the resolution
inversion
inverted
has still
method also failed
bed thickness below 1/4 dominant period.
recursively
limit
nature
of
the
been observeU.
to
resolve
the
The "pUllup" observedon the
section is also in evidence here.
In summary,even though sparsespike methods give an output section that
is visually
more appealing than recursively
appear to be a way to break the
inverted sections, there does not
low resolution
limit
of 1/4 of the dominant
sei smic peri od.
Part 7  Inversion applied to Thin Beds
Page 7
mk
Introduction to Seismic Inversi.on Methods
12
16
20
24
28
Brian Russell
32
36
40
44
48
300
400.
Figure 7.5 Recursive inversion of wedgemodelshownin Figure 7.4.
'
12
16
' i '
20
' I i
24
28
32
36
40
44
48
100..................
300
400
500
,,
Figure 7.6
Maximumlikelihoodderived impedanceof wedgemoUel
shown i n Figure 7.4.
Part 7  Inversion applied to Thin Beds
Page 7
[ntroductJon
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Bran Russel
PART 8  MODELBASED INVERSION
_
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
....
Page 8 
Introduction
8.1
to Seismic
Introducti
In the
information
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
on
past
sections
directly
of
the
course,
we have derived
reflectivity
from the seismic section and used recursire
produce a final velocity versus depth model.
inversion to
We have also seen that these
methods can be severely affected by noise, poor amplitude recovery, and the
bandlimited nature of seismic data.
will
be included
In
first
in
the
final
inversion
and comparing the model to
our
approac is
intuitively
data
itself.
seismic data.
We shall then use the
comparison between real and modeled data to iteratively
the model in such a way as to better
this
result.
this chapter, we shall consider the case of builaing a geologic moUel
results of tis
of
That is, any problems in the data itsel f
match the seismic data.
shown in Figure 8.1.
Notice
that
update
The basic idea
this
method is
very appealing since it avoids the airect inversion of the seismic
On the other hand, it may be possible to come up with a model
that matchesthe data'very well, but is incorrect. (This can be seen easily
by noting that there are infinitely manyvelocity/depth pairs that will result
in the sametime value.) This is referred to as the problem of nonuniqueness.
To implement the approach shown in
fundamental questions.
First,
Figure 8.1,
we need to answer two
what is the mathematical relationship
the model data and the seismic data?
Second,
between
how do'we update the' model? We
shall consider two approaches
to theseproblems,the generalizedlinear
inversion (GLI) approach outlined in CooRe and Schneider (1983}, and the
Seismic Lithologic
(SLIM) method which was developed in Gelland and Larner
(1983).
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
Page 8 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods'
Brian
Russell
CALCULATE
UPDATE
IMPEDANCE
ERROR
ERROR
SMALL
ENOUGH
NO
YES
SOLUTION
= ESTIMATE
Model Based Invemion
Figure 8.1
Flowchart for the model based inversion
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
technique.
Page 8 
Introduction
8.2
%o Seismic
Generalized
Linear
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
Inversion
The generalized linear inversion(GLI) method is a methodwich can be.
applied to virtually any set of geophysicalmeasurementsto determine the
geologicalsituation whichproduced these results. That is, given a set of
geophysicalobservations, the GLI method
will derive the geological model
which best fits
tese observations in a
least squares sense.
Mathematically,
if we express the model and observations as vectors
M:(m
1,m
2, ..... , mk)
T=vector
ofkmodel
parameters,
and
T: (t1,t2, ..... , tn)T:
functional
of n observations.
between the model and observations can be expressed
Then the relationship
in the
vector
form
t i = F(ml,m2, ...... , mk)
Once
the
functional
relationship
i : 1, ...
, n.
has been derived
observations and the model, any set of
between
model parameters will
the
produce an
output. But what model?GLI eliminatesthe needfor trial
and error by
analyzing the error betweenthe model output and the observations, and then
perturbing the model parameters in such a way as to produce an output which
will produceless error.
In this way, we may iterate towards a solution.
Mathematically'
F(M)
)F(MO)
= F(Mo)+ aT
M,
MOInitialodel,
where
M:
true earth model,
AM:
changein model parameters,
F(M) : observations,
F(Mo):calculated
valuesfrominitial
model, and
)F(M
O)
.2
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
= change
in calculated
values.
Page 8 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Flethods
Brian Russell
IMPEDANCE
(GM/CM3)(FT/SEC)
X1000
IMPEDANCE
4.6
41.5AMPLITUDE
41.5 4.6
ml
41.5 4.6
41.5
ii
,i
i,
ii
:.
__
Figure 8.2
A synthetic
test of the GLI approach to model based
inversion.
(a) Input impedance. (b) Reflectivity derived from (a)
with added multiples. (c) Recurslye inversion of (b).
(d) Recurslye
inversion
of (b)convolved
(e) GLI inversion of (b).
Part
8  Modelbased
I nversi on
with wavelet.
(Cooke and Schneider, 1983)
Page 8 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
But note that the error between the observations and the computed values
i s simply
F = F(M) F(MO).
Therefore,
the above equation can be re expressed as a matrix equation
F
where
= A AM,
A:
matrix
with
of deri vatives
n rows anU k columns.
The soluti on to the above equation would appear to be
1
= A
where Al: matrixinverseof A.
F,
However, since there are usually more observations than parameters (that
is, n is usually greater
therefore
does
not
than k)
have
the matrix A is
true
inverse.
This
usually not square and
is
overdeterminedcase. To solve the equation in that
referred
to
as
an
case, we use a least
squares solution often referred to as the MarquartLevenburg
method(see Lines
and Treitel
(1984)).
The solution
is given by
M: (AT'A)IA
TZF.
Figure 8.1 can be thought of as a flowchart of the GLI methodif we make
the impedanceupdate using the methodjust described. However, we still must
derive
the
observations.
convol utional
functional
relationship
The simplest
necessary to relate
solution
the
which presents itself
model to
the
is the standarO
model
s(t)
= w(t) * r(t),
where r(t)
= primaries only.
Cooke and Schneider (1983) use a modilied version of the previous formula
in which multiples
and transmission losses are modelled. Figure 8.2 is a
composite from their paper showingthe results of an inversion applied to
single synthetic impedance trace.
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
Page 8 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
'
Russell
IMP.EDANCE
x1OOO
(GM/CM3)(FT/$EC)
._
,.o
. .::
. .:.
,, ,,
. . .....
. .:.........::
:...., ...... .. :...lO
? "e'.
: :........:..:.._
........
,,
, .....
.
4':
':::./.:.!i!i..::..':..
:.:......:.':ii.'':..
:.....
'......'..'..
:.' }::!
 ..'.:"
'
300M$
Figure 8.3
2D model to test GLI algorithm.
The well on the right
encountersa gas sand while the well on the left does not.
(Cooke and Schneider, 1983)
IMPEDANCE
AMPLITUDE
(GM/CM3! (FT/SEC)X1000
10
,,,.l
Figure 8.4
Model
traces
derived
from
m)del in Figure 8.3.
{Cooke and Sc)neider, 1983)
Part 8  Modelbased nversion
Figure 8.5
38 10
38
GLI inversion of model traces.
Compare
with sonic log on right side of Fiiure 8.3.
(Cooke and Schneider, 1983)
Page 8 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inver. sJon Methods
Brian
Russell
In Figure 8.2, notice that the advantage of incorporating multiples in
the solution is that, although they are modelled in couting
the seismic
response,they are not included in the model parameters. This is a big
advantage over recursire methods, since those methods incorporate
multiples into the solution if they are not removedfrom the section.
Another
important
feature
of
this
particular
method is
the
the
parameterizationused. Instead of assigninga different value of velocity at
each time sample, large
geological blocks were defined.
assigneda starting impedancevalue, impedancegradient,
time.
This
Each block was
and a thickness in
reduceU the numberof parameters and therefore
simplified
the
computation.However,there is enough flexibility in this modellingapproach
to
derive a fairly
detailed geological inversion.
Wewill
now look at both a
syntheticandreal examplefromCookeandSchneider(1983).
A 20 synthetic example was next considered by Cooke and Schneider
(1983). Figure 8.3 showsthe model, which consisted of two gas sands encased
in shale.
One well encountered the
sand and the other missed.
The impedance
profile of the discovery well is shownon the right.
Figure 8.4 shows
synthetic traces over the two wells, in which a noise component
has been
added.
Finally,
Figure 8.5 showsthe initial
guess and the
final
solution,
for which the gradients have been set to zero.
Notice that although the
solution is not perfect, the gas sand has been delineated.
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
Page 8 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
YES
_____J
' '
 _
FINALMObEL
._ x,
.... r  ;,
.'%..
cxr.
.,'_;'.:.
, . . . .. ..
t ...
Figure 8.6
I11 ustrated
flow chart
for
the SLIM method.
(Western GeophysicalBrochure)
Part 8  Modelbased Inversion
Page 8 
! ntroducti
on to Sei stoic !nver si on Methods
Brian
Russel 1
8.3 Sei_smic
L_ithologicModelling(,SLIM)
Although the nthod outlined in Cookeand Schneider (1983)
promise, it has not,
commercially.
as
far
However,
fully
released,
than
the
direct
of
a seismic
flowchart
the
layers
of
variable
points along the line.
similar
and
is
Modeling (SLIM) method of
perturbation
of
the
SLIM method taken from a Western
as in the GLI method, an initial
velocity,
Also, the
of a model rather
section.
created and comparedwith a seismic section.
of
very
Although the details of the algorithm have not been
inversion
Notice that,
aware, been implemented
appears
Seismic Lithologic
the method does involve
Figure 8.6 shows a
brochure.
author is
one method that
commercially available is the
Western Geophysical.
as this
showed much
density,
geological model is
The model is defined as a series
and thickness at
seismic wavelet is either
various
control
supplied (from a
previous wavelet extraction procedure) or is estimated from the data.
synthetic model is then comparedwith
the
The
seismic data and the leastsquared
error sum is computed. The model is perturbed in such a way as to reduce the
error,
and the process is repeated until
convergence.
The user has total
geological information
control over the constraints and may incorporate
from any source. The major advantage of this method
over classical
methods is
recurslye
that
noise
in the seismic
section
is not
incorporated. However,as in the GLI method,thesolution is nonunique.
The best examples of
Gelland and Larner (1983).
initial
applying
this
method to
Figure 8.7 is taken from their paper and shows an
Denver basin model which has 73 flat
boundaries
of
real data are given in
sonic log.
layers derived from the major
Beside this is the actual stacked
data
to
be
Page 8 
10
inverted.
Part
8  Modelbased
I nversi
on
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
1kit
,1.4
1.4
1.6
2.0
2.0
Stack
Initial
Figure 8.7
Left' Init)al Denver
Basinmodelseismic.
Right: Stacked section from DenverBasin.
(Gelfand andLarner, 1983).
lkft
.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
1.8
Field
data
Synthetic
Figure 8.8
Left:
Reflectivity
Fna SLIM JnversJon of
Figure 8.7 spl iceU into
Right Final reflectivity
from
'  _  ____ii m
' '
(Gelfand and Larner,
Part 8  Modelbased Inversion
data shown 1n
field data.
inversion.
1983).
..........
Page 8 
2.0
.m:
11
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
In Figure 8.8 the stack is again shown in its most complexregion, with
the final synthetic data is shownafter 7 iterations through the program.
Notice the excellent agreement. On the right hand sie of Figure 8.9 is the
final reflectivity section from which the pseudoimpedanceis derived. Since
this reflectivity is "spiy", or broad band, it already contains the low
frequencycomponent
necessary
for full inversion. Finally, Figure 8.10 shows
the final inversion compared
with a traditional recursire inversion.
Note the
'blocky' nature of the parameterbasedinversion when comparedwith the
recurs i ve i nvers i on.
In
summary,
which can
reflectivity
parameter
be thought
is
of
extracted.
based inversion i s an iterative
as a geologybaseddeconvolution since the full
I
propagatedthroughthe final result
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
model1ing scheme
has the
advantage
as in recursire
that
errors
are
not
inversion.
Page 8 
12
Introduction
to Seismic
Methods
500ft
N
lkft
Inversion
Brian
114
mile
S
Russell
114
mile
SE
.5
.7
l m
1.9
Figure 8.9
Impedance section
derived
from SLIM inversion
of
Denver Basln 1 ine showni n Figure 8.7.
{GelfanUand Larner, 1983)
W
lkft
50011
N
114mileS
114mileS
1.7
19
Fi gure 8.10
Traditional
recursire
inversion
of Denver Basin line
from Fi gur.e 8.7.
(Gelfana anU Larner, 1983)
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
Page 8 
13
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Appendix
8!
Methods
Brian
Russell
Mat_r_ix
.appljc.at.
ions_inGeophy.s.ics
Matrix theory showsup in every aspect of geophysicalproocessing.Before
looking at generalized matrix theory, let us considerthe application of
matrices to
the solution of a linear equation, probably the most important
application.
For example, let
3x1+2x2 : 1, and
x1 x2 = 2.
By inspection, we see that the solution is
However,we Could .haveexpressed the equations in the matrix form
A
x1
1 1
x2
y,
or
The sol ution
is,
therefore
x
1
x1
x2
8  Modelbased
Inversion
1 . 2
1/5
or
Part
y,
Page 8 
14
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Me.thods
In the above equations we had the
and the
problem terefore
of dimension N.
same numberof equations as unknowns
had a unique answer. In matrix terms, this
that the problem can be set up as a
vector
Brian Russell
square matrix of dimension N x N times a
However, in geophysical problemswe are Uealing with
the real earth anU the equations are never as nice.
fewer
means
equations than
unknowns (in
Generally,
which case the
we either
situation
is
have
called
underdetermined) or more equations than unknowns(in which case the situation
is
is
calleU overdetermined). In geophysicalproblems,the underUetermined
case
of
little
interest
overde termi neU
to
case is
us since
there
is
no unique
of muchinterest since it occurs in
solution.
the
The
following
problems:
(!)
Surface
consi stent
resi dual statics,
(2) Lithological modelling,and
(3) Refracti on model
1i ng.
The overdetermined system of
categories
consistent
extending our earlier
equations can be split into two separate
inconsistent.
These are best described
by
an
example.
(a) Cons.i
st Overd..etermined
Lin.earEqua.t.
ion.s
In
this
equations
case
are
we
simply
reUunUant equations may
have more equations
than
unknowns, but
scaled versions of te others.
In
this
the extra
case,
the
simply be eliminated, reducingthe prlemto the
square matrix case. For examp.le, consider adding a third equation to our
earl ier example,
so that
3x1+2x2 : 1,
x1 x2 : 2,
anU
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
5x1 5x2 : 10.
Page 8 
15
Introduction
to Seismic
This may be written
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
in matrix form as
x1
x
But notice that the third equation is simply five times the second, and
therefore conveys no new information.
equations back to the original
We may thus
reduce the system of
form.
(b) Inco,
ns,
is,tentOverd.
eermine.
d L.i.near
Equai.on?
In this case the
extra
equations are not scalea
versions
of other
equationsin the set, but conveyconflicting information. In this case, there
is no solution to the problem which will
solve all the equations.
This is
usually the case in our seismic wor and indicates the presence of measurement
noise and errors.
As an example, consider a modification to the preceding
equations, so that
3x1+2xZ  1,
x1 x2  Z,
ana 5x1 $x2 = 8.
This may be written
in matrix form as
2
I
5
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
xI
x2
Page 8 
16
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
He.thods
Brian
Russell
'Now the third equationis not reducible to either of the other two, ana
an alternate
of
least
solution
solution must be found.
The most popular aproach is the method
squares, which minimizes the sumof the squared error
and the observed results.
That is,
if
we set the error
between the
to
e=Axy,
then we si reply mini mize
n
eTe(eI , ez, .......
, en)
ei
Le.
Re expressing the 'preceding equation in terms of the values x, y, and A,
we
have
E = eTe= (y  Ax)T(y
 Ax)
= yTy_ xTATy
_ yTAx
+ xTATAx.
We then solve the equation
bE_
bxi
The final
solution to
the
leastsquares
problem is given by the normal
equati OhS
AT
Ax = AT y
or
Part
8  Modelbased
Inversion
x = (ATA)lATy
.
Page 8 
17
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Bran Russell
PART g  TRAVELTIME INVERSION
ml
Part
g  Traveltime
Inversion
ii
Page 9 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Sei smi c Travel
9,1
Brian Russell
Inversion
time
Introduction
_
In
L_
_.
this
section we will
look at a type of inversion
several names, incluUing traveltime
tomography.
The last
term
inversion,
that
raypath inversion,
goes under
ana seismic
tenUs to be overuseU at the moment, so it
is
important to use the term correctly.
In section 9.3 we shall showan example
whic may be considerea as seismic tomography. As all of te other names
suggest,
however,
seismic
measurements to infer
the structure
extracteU are velocities
structure
traveltime
and
can be derived.
of the earth.
depths,
Initial)y,
but Jr'has becomeobvious that
inversion
this
measurements can be used effectively
uses a set of traveltime
The parameters
aria [herefore
which
a gross model of earth
this was considered the ultimate
accurate
set
are
of velocity
goal,
versus depth
to constrain other types of
inversion.
For example, the'velocities could be used as the low frequency componentin
recursire inversion, or as the velocity control for a depth migration.
The way in which traveltime
set of times from a dataset.
inversion is carried out is to first
These picks
pick
my come from any of three basic
types of seismic datasetsSurface
seismic measurements
 shots and geophones on the surface,
VSP measurements
 shots. on surface,
geopones in well,
and
Crosshol e measurements
 sots anU geophonesboth in well.
Once the times have been picked, they must be made to fit
subsurface.
In the next section,
we will
a model of the
look at some straighforwara
examples
of using traveltime picks in order to resolve the earth's velocity and depth
structure.
Part
9  Travel
time
I nversi on
Page 9 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
(a)
Methods
Brian
Russell
(b)
Figure 9.1 Travel paths through a single,
constant velocity
block.
(a.) Surface recording, (b) VSP recording, (c)Crosshole recording
(b)
(c)
Figure 9.2 Travel paths through two blocks of slightly
differing
velocity.
(a) Surface recording, (b) VSP recording, (c) Crosshole recording
Part
9  Travel
time
Inversion
Page 9 
Introductfonto SefsmJ
c Inversfon Methods
Brjan Russell
9. Numerical_Examples
of .Travelti Inv.
ersion
Consider
the simplestpossiblecase, a constant
velocityearth. Figure
9.1 showsthe travel paths that wouldresult from the three geometry
configurationsgiven a square area of dimension L by L. Note that the
traveltimes in Figure 9.1 would simply be:
(1) Surface sei smic'
tZ
L p
or
p t/Z
L,
(z) vsP
t L p
or p  t /iL, ana
t=Lp
or
(3) Crosshol e'
p=t/L,
where p  ! / V.
Obviously, all three sets of measurementscontain the sameinformation.
However,if the velocity(or slowness
p) andthe depth are both unknown,
neitheronecanbe determined
froma singletimemeasurement.
Anevengreater
ambiguity comes into play if we havea single measurement
but morethan one
box. In Figureg.g this situation is shown. Notice that the equationsnow
would involve three unknownsand only one measurement.
A moregeneralmodelis proposed
in Bishopet al (lg85) an Boringet al
(1986). The earth is representedas a number
of boxesof constantsize and
velocity.
Although
thevelocity
of eachboxis a constant,
thevelocity
may
vary from box to box. This is shownin Figure 9.3. The objective is thus to
computethe seismic travel path through each box using the traveltime
measurements.
A keyproblem
hereis howto allowthe rays to travel through
the boxes. The first order approximationwould be straight rays with no
bending. However,i f Snell's law is use4, the problembecomes
moredifficult
to sol ve.
Partg
Travel i'i me''in'ver'si on .....
Pag g' '
4'
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Source
Figure 9.3
Methods
Brian
Russell
Receiver
Separation of the earth into small constant vel oci ty blocks
for sei stoic travel time inversion.
(Bording et al,
Part
g  Traveltime
Inversion
1986)
Page 9 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Let us apply the straight ray approximationin the simplecaseof having
simply two blocks of different velocity. In this case, we have coupled
together both surface and VSP measurements. Two possible recorUing
arrangementsare shownin Figures 9.4 and 9.5.
The situations illustrated
are
obviously oversimplified since we have assumeda straight ray approximation in
both boxes. That is, there is no refraction at the velocity discontinuity,
and the reflection point is directly at the center of the two boxes. However,
if we assumethat the velocities vary only slightly, this approximation is
reasonable.
Let us start with the situation illustrated by Figure 9.4. In this case,
tere is a single shot with geophonesboth on the surface and in a borehole at
the base of the layer. If we assume that the sides of the boxes are unity in
length (1 cm or m or km.
m), the travel time equations are
(1) For the. raypath from S to R
wherePl: 1/velocityin box1
P2: 1/velocityin box2
(Z) Fortheraypath
fromS to R2:
t2=
qPl+ P2.
2
Thus, the total problem can be expressed in matrix form as:
Pl
r ]
P2
tl
:
t2
or Ap: t .
The solution to the previous equation is then
p = Alt.
Unfortunately,
a quick try at solving the above equation will show that
the Ueterminant of A is
Physically,
this
is
O,
which
telling
means that
the inverse is nonrealizable.
us that the two travel
paths spene equal
proportions of their paths in eac box.
Part
9  Travel
time
Inversion
Page 9 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
P,,
P"% P,'v,
Figure 9.4
Surface
for a single shot.
R!
Figure 9.5
and VSP raypaths
St
Surface and VSP raypaths for two separate
Part 9  Travel time Inversion
shots.
Page 9 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
A simple way to remedy this situation
raypath.
This is shownin Figure 9.5.
In
shot onehalf a box length to te left
case, the traveltime
is to move the shot for the second.
this situation,
we have moveUthe
for the recorUing in te hole.
In this
equations are
(1) Forthe raypathfromS1 to R1:
tl: 1Pl+P2
(2) Forthe raypathfromS2 to R2In this case notice from the diagramthat
tan 0 : 1/1 $ : 2/3 = 0 6667, or B : 33 69o
Thus
cos 0 = 0.8320
and (see figure)
x = 1/(2 x 0.832) = 0.6
y = 3/(
x 0.832) = 1.8
yx=l.2
Therefore
t2:1.2 Pl + 0.6 P2 '
Thus, the total
1.2
with
problem can be expressed in matrix form as'
Pl
tl
0.6
P2
t2
sol ution
Pl
0.6
 2
t1
1.2
t2
o.85
P2
Problem' Try to solve the above equation
and 1.1 kin/sec.
Tat is,
when the two velocities
work out the traveltimes
are 1.0
and plug them into the last
matrix equati on.
Part
9  Travel time
Inversion
Page 9 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Pick seismic
Estimatevelocityat well
usingsoniclogandVSP
reflectiontimes,t
Estimate
V(x,z)byusing
V(xo,z),
Initial
Model
the reflection traveltimes and the
theassumption
of verticalrays
Start with
top layer
Layer
Computer
forward
Stripping
.Inversion
PerturbV(x,z)
byleastsquares
or manually
Add another
layer
Final
Seismic Model
Figure 9.6
modeltraveltimes,
f,
by normalraytracing
It fll'
layersbeen
ii
Model
iscomplete,,
I
A possibleflowchart for seismictraveltim inversion.
(Lines et al,
Part 9  Travel time Inversion
1988)
Page 9 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
9.3 Seismi
c.T..omo.
graphy
The term tomography
was first used in the medicalfield for the imaging
of humantissue using Nuclear MagneticResonance
(NMR) and other physical
measurements. In the seismic field
the
velocity
field
it
has come to mean the reconstruction
of the earth by the analysis of traveltime
of
measurements.
Excellent overviews of tomographyare g.iven in Bording et al (1986), and Lines
et al (1988}.
You will find tat the latter
paper introduces the term
"cooperative inversion" since both seismic and gravity measurementsare used
in
the inversion, but that much of the technique used by the authors
can be
consi alered sei smic tomography.
Figure 9.6, taken from the paper'by Lines et al (1988), shows the
chart that they propose for performing
be considered quite general,
traveltime
inversion.
even though many variations
of it
flow
This method can
are used in the
industry. Basically, the process starts with an estimate of the model which,
in the flowchart shownin Figure 9.6, is deriveU from the sonic log and VSP
measurements. Next, traveltime
picks are made from the seismic data.
In this
case, stacked CDPdata is usecl, but the shot profiles (or CDPprofiles)
could
also be used.
refraction
As well,
arrivals.
travel time
In
raytraced, and an error
traveltimes.
the
is
next
picks
can be made from VSP data and
stage of
the
computed between the
process,
the
model is
computed and observea
Based on the error computed, a new model is computeU. This
done using the GLI
technique
described
procedure shownin Figure 9.6,
in Chapter 7 of these notes.
is
In the
the inversion is done layer by layer until
the
model is complete.
Although any traveltime
Stewart
inversion can be considered tomography, Dr.
(personal communication) points out that to be analagous with
medical field,
where physical
measurements are
Rob
the
taken completely around t'he
imaged object, a true seismic tomography experiment would involve aata on more
than one side of the portion
seismic
Part
of
the
earth
to
be
imaged,
such as surface
and VSP.
9  Travel time
Inversion
Page 9 
10
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
WlC
0
_
roll i
1Z
..2
x
I vsP SOURCE
3D SOURCE GEOPHONE
Surface geometry for tomographicimaging example.
Figure 9.7
(Chiu and Stewart,
Well C VSP
Une8901
898921
89DB8960
898980
89CDP
Une
CDP
0.0
..........
::=':".::"'::':.:'::.ir.:iE)".Z!;.".h.
.
0.1 ':......
" ''":'":
1987)
Depth (m)
185 9O7
205
0
fi'L .o.
:(;:
460
730
895
1o
?6o
895
. mow, .'.'
.......
. '..
oJ
0.4
o.5
..
(b)
(a)
Fi gue 9.8
(a) Picked events on 3D seismic..
(b) Picked events
on VSP.
(Stewart and Chui,
.....
Part
9  Traveltime
Inversion
Page 9 
11
1986)
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
An example of using multiple datasets for seismic tomography is found in
Stewart and Chiu (1986), and Chiu and Stewart (1987).
The objective was a
Glauconitic
Since
channel
sand which
containeU heavy oil.
this
was a
development survey, a lot of measurementswere available to imagethe
subsurface, including well log data, VSP, and 3D seismic. Figure 9.7 shows
the ensity of information along a portion of one seismic line. Figure 9.8
shows the various datasets used in the tomographicimaging. Figure 9.8(a)
showsthe stacked seismic data with the key events indicated and Figure 9.8{b)
showsthe picked VSP from well C. Finally, Figure 9.9 showsthe well l'ogs and
synthetic
from a different
well,
clearly
indicating
the Glauconitic
channel.
The tomographic technique involved picking events from both the VSP first
arrivals and the prestack 3D seismic data. Traveltime inversion wasdone by
the
technique described
in Chiu and Stewart (1987).
The method involves
starting with a simple modelof the subsurfaceand perturbing this modelusing
the errors between the picked traveltimes and the raypath times through the
model. This
raytracing
method differs
from the
method shown in
is done a nonzero source to receiver
offset,
Figure
9.6 since
and also the VSP data.
To test the method, Chiu and Stewart created a synthetic model. Figures
g.10(a) and (b) show raytrace plots for the VSP and surface Uata,
respectively,
through this model.
ZERO PHASE
BANDPASS
10/15  80/110 Hz
RFC
NORMAL
DENSITY (kg/m 3 )
VEOCITY(m/sec)
SOIl
lime
030O
(sec)
till
Figure g. g
Wel1 log curves and synthetic
IO#
showing Glauconitic
channel.
(Stewart and Chiu 1987)
Part
9  Travel
time
I nversi on
Page 9 
12
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
offset (krn)
1.o
0.0
2.0
$OulCE
A OPHONE'
(a)
Figure 9.10
{)
(a) Surface raypaths through model used to test inversion.
(b) VSP raypaths through model.
1.0
,
ii
2.0
! i 1! 
1987)
Voity
Offset (km)
0.0
(Chiu and Stewart,
0.0
2.0
4.O

Figure 9.11
Results of tomographicinversion of model data
using VSPand surface data.
Part
9  Travel
time
Inversion
(Chiu and Stewart,
1987)
Page 9 
13
Introductionto SeismicInversionMethods
Brian Russell
Figure9.11 shows
the results of the inversionprocessusingboththe VSP
and surface seismicdata. To makethe test morerealistic,
randomnoise was
added
to travel'time
picks. Notice that thecorrectresulthasbeenobtained
in
four
iterations.
Let us now return to the case study described initially.
The final
velocity/depth model is shownin Figure 9.12. Notice that the velocities fit
quite well with the averagedsonic log velocities. This velocity model was
usedto produceboth a depthmigrated seismic section, shownin Figure 9.13,
and a full seismicinversionbasedon the maximumlikelihood
technique. The
final inversion is not showndue to colour reproduction limitations.
As can be seen in Figure 9.13,
the Glauconitic
delineated. The depth tie is also excellent.
channels have been well
The conclusion that the authors
makeis that if severaltypesof geophysical
measurements
can be intergrated,
the result is an improvedproduct. Each set of data acts as a constraint
the
Part
on
others.
9  Travel
time
Inversion
Page 9 
14
Introduction
to Seismic Inversi on Methods
Offset(km)
1.0
0.0
Brian Russell
Velocity
Oan/s)
LO
0.0
3.0
6.0
TC)iliO6RAPmC
(C)
INVERSION
 SONCL06 (1:2)
Figure 9.12
Results of tomographic inversion of G1auconitic channel.
(ChiUandStewart,1987)
. : .m,,,
...
.......... ' 't ''"','
l..,.,.,;,,.
.:'
._:_.4sll
,_,
i!',i,?
,a..
,:.I.,,t.:,
?
800 ..
:
900
:'":
""' ""' .......
'
Depth
(m) 1000
11oo
1200
1300
1400
Fi gure g. 13
Depth
migration
of seismic
aatashown
inFigure
9.8(a).
Tomographic
velocities of Figure9.12 havebeenused.
(Stewart an Chiu,
Part
9  Travel time
Inversion
Page 9 
15
1986)
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
PART 10  AMPLITUDE VERSUS OFFSET INVERSION
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset
Inversion
Page 10 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
10.1 AV.O
Theo.y.._
Until
traces.
result
now, we have discusseO only the inversion of zeroincidence seismic
That is, we have considered
of
a seismic ray striking
each reflection
coefficient
to be the
the interface between two layers
at
zero
degrees. In this case, the 'reflection coefficient is a simple function of the
Pwave velocity and density in each of the layers.
The formula, which we have
seen many times, is simply
i+lvi+  ivi
zi+ zi
ri= Yoi+iVi+l+
yO
iVi
where
r:
Zi+l
+ Zi
reflection
coefficient
yo: density,
V = Pwave vel oci ty,
Z:
and
Layer i overlies
When we allow the seismic ray to strike
angles,
as
results.
coefficient
in
a commonshot recording,
In this case, there is P to
becomes a function
density of each of the layers.
derived:
reflected
acoustic impedance,
Layer i+1.
the boundary at nonzero incidence
a much .more complicated
Swave conversion
of the Pwave velocity,
situation
and the reflection
Swave velocity,
and
Indeed, there are now four curves that can be
Pwave amplitude, transmitteU Pwave amplitude,
reflected
Swaveamplitude,and transmittedSwave amplitude. The variation of
amplitude
with
Poisson's ratio,
offset
also
involves
another
physical
parameter
called
which is related to Pand Swave velocity by the formula
' =
(Vp
/ VS
2 Z .
Poisson's ratio can theoretically
vary between 0 and 0.5.
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset Inversion
Page 10 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
$i
Brian Russell
Sr
at, t
BOUNDARY
(X2'2
Figure 10.1
Reflectedandtransmittedrays createdwhena Pwave
strikes the boundarybetweentwo layers.
(Waters, 1981).
o,2+,
sin2,
 ' 'cos2, x,n:/
D,/cos2+,/
Figure 10.2
Zoeppritzequationswhichdescribethe amplitudes
of the rays shownin Figure 10.1.
(Waters, 1981).
Part 10  Ampli rude versus Offset
Inversion
Page 10
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
The equations from which the ampl'itude variations can be derived are
callea
the Zoeppritz
equations. They are derived from the
continuity
of
displacement and stress in both the normal and tangential directions across an
interface
between two layers.
Figure 10.1 showsthe seismic rays
across a
boundary, and Figure 10.2 gives the final form of the equations. They are
taken from textbook by Waters (however, someof the signs were wrong, and
they are fixed
in
the diagram).
Since we have four equations with four
unknowns,they can be rearranged in the form of a x 4 matrix equation
Axy
with
soluti
on
x = Aly .
Over the years, several
effects.
authors
have discussed amplitude versus offset
However, these authors concluded that the effect would be negligible
on seismic data.
In
a landmark paper, Ostrander (1984) showedthat for a
significant changein Poisson's ratio, a major changein the Pwaveamplitude
coefficient can be seenas a function of offset. This Poisson's ratio change
is
most noticeable
in a gas sand, where the ratio
.
encasing shales to as low as 0.1
that,
in
the
gas sand itself.
such extreme cases, the Pwave reflection
positive to negative for
increase
in
can change from 0.4 in
Ostrander showed
coefficient
a decrease in Poisson's ratio
in Pwave velocity,
or from negative to positive
the
can go from
coupled with an
for an increase
in
Poisson's ratio coupled with a decrease in Pwave velocity.
Figure 10.3(a) showsthe gas sand model that Ostrander used and Figure
10.3(b)
shows the result of
reflection
shows that
coefficients.
this
effect
can
amplitude
versus
offset modelling of the Pwave
Figures 10.5(a) and (b), also taken from Ostrander,
inUeed
be
observeU
on
common offset
stack.
Figure 10.5(a) showsa stackeOseismic section witl three apparent "bright
spot" anomalies. Unfortunately, only wells A anU B were productive. The three
common
offset stacks, shownin Figure 10.5(b), indicate that only locations A
,
and B actually Uisplay an AVOeffect.
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset Inversion
Page 10 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
GAS*':*"**
tt
VlZ=8.000
/32 "2.14
;...::.,
SHALE
:o.,
$=10.000
'
/4)3 =2.40
('3 =0.4
Figure 10.3 (a)
Synthetic
gas sand model.
(Ostrander,
1984)
0.41
IN SAND
0.3
0.2
t..,
0.1
ANGLE
OF INCIDENCE
 ,'e'
I0 o
20 o
30
40
..,
NO
GAS
.,,,,,,,.,.ooo.o.o..... ..ooo.,
o.,.,o.,'.
o,.,,,o
.,,o*oo......
0.2
0.3
0.,4
Figure 10.3 (b) Computedreflection coefficients as a function of offset
for reflections
from top and bottom interfaces
of model
sown in Figure 10.3 (a).
(Ostrander,
IlL

Part 10  Amplitudeversus Offset Inversion
_,
11
m m
im
1984)
Page 10 
Introduction
The
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
method useU to identify
this effect
Brian
is only partly
Russell
qualitative,
and
can be diagrammedas shownbelowINPUT
BUI L D MODEL
SEISMIC
SHOT PROFILES
COMPUTE
COFFSTACK
SYNTHETIC
im
...
VISUAL
COMPARISON
MANUALLY
CHANGE PARAMETERS
,m
NO
MODEL MATCHES
REALITY
.
Figure 10.4
Flow
Chart
for
Manual
AVO Inversion
Obviously, this visual meth'od
of comparison
leavesmuchto be Oesired.
We will therefore look at several methods for the qualitative
inversion of AVO
data,
the
both
of
normalincidence
which have been looked at
previously
in
context
of
inversion.
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset
Inversion
Page 10
Introduction
10
0.0
to Seismic Inversion
170
160
150
140
Methods
130
Brian Russell
120
110
100
90
70
,  , "
! : " :.
' '' ' ' : ....  '  I;
"
'I'*O..',m * ....
. re!: ' l, 't
.". '.'..' ' t''
I
, I i I, mm I.. i ' ,. '
'
..,.,,.,....,.,,....
,",',,.
.....
,,,,'.,,.,',,,,,
.....
,,.,.....
,,,'
.........
,~.,
.......
,,.'""'....'!.'_'"' ..... ,,., .............
'....
'
i i.
ii I
IIII
II
0.0
'i: _.,......'_'_..
,::;.':
', ..=..:.'
':."i "="
'...''?'?'?'?'?'L,.'....,'::
....
..c
.._ .o..:?;i.
' ?." ":'..
: ' ......
il ;,.:.?:=;.'.'..='.::1: . .
,..
....,_....:,..:..,.;,...
.*...
.... .
. ... . ; ...... .. .:..;,.;:...
0.5 '.l_'.. .: : __..._. .... _
_:_ ....4.
..... <?r....
. .:.;. ,"".r.._".::
:.:...:..._...
........
_:.....;._..=
,'*' .......
':'.:r'_..;
. . 0.5
1.0
I.,...,:,....,;..
.........:.,.....
...
....,..,
t,,,
"_,,,d,.,
Il.leeile*e,,I,'t
! :litIll""'
IIt'l';I;,d
..........12.0
.
..
,e.. Illllll.1111el'..le
............
;.;
.... :.....i:;
 .. '."'1,
.'1.
'.:;=....=:;;:.1
.... ...,;.".....
2.5
'.........
""":":
.......................
2..5
..... ,......,..,...,.,...........,............
,.., .1,
..?'"'1
"' '
Figure 10.5(a)
........;:..'..
"1;;::=
....:":"
.....;""':"'
""1'.'''' ' "':,';;;;":',::
....:"
'}i:.;.=i.;."':;::.'.::
'.'
.......;.::.;:..
Sacked seismic line showing"brigh spot" anomalies.
Loca%ions
A an
B are
known gas.
(Osl:rander,
!984)
SP 80
":l:1111il
....
,e*'11:,l:,
ol,, titIll,
....
eellie
;;;;;;;;i;il
,,
' '
..111tl
' ........
6$'
1012'
6952'
1012
Fiure 10.5(D)
Common
offset sl;acksover locations A, B, andC from
stackedsection in Figure 10.5/a). Notice the AVO
increase
on A and B.
(Os!;ranOer,
Par[ 10  A,pli[ude
versus Offset
Inversion
1984)
Page 10 
Introduction
to Sei stoic Inversi
10.2 AVO Inversion
Recall
on Methods
Bri an Russell
by GLI
that
in the theory of generalized linear inversion
were three important components'a geological
relationship
(.GLI)
there
modelof the earth, a physical
between the earth and a set of geophysical measurements,anU a
set of geophysicalobservations. This methodWasdiscusseain both chapters8
anU
9,
applied
to
stacked data
respectively.
Now, let us apply the
wil 1 be cal led
AVO inversi
In
secti on 10.1,
inversion
method to
an traveltime
unstacked data.
inversion,
The result
on.
the three components needed to perform GLI inversion
on
AVOUatawe,redescribed. Ourmodel of the earth is a series of layers with
te el astic 'parameters of Pand Swave vel oci ty, density, and Poi sson'S ratio.
Our physical relationship
between this
derived using the Zoeppritz equations.
model ana seismic CDPprofiles
And, finally,
picked amplitudes and times of events on a CDPprofile
was
the observations are the
or common
offset
stack.
By computingderivatives from the Zoeppritz matrix, it is possible to set up a
GLI solution
data.
This
to te AVO problem similar
solution
to the solution
found for zerooffset
is
aF(Mo)
FIM): F(M
D)+ )M bM,
where
Mo:initial earthmodel,
M:
AM:
true earth model,
change in model parameters,
F(M)  AVOobservations,
F(MO):Zoeppritz
valuesfrominitial model,and
)F(M
O)
i): change
in calculated
values.
The implementation is simply a variation
of
the manualmethod, anO is
sinownon the next page.
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset Inversion
Page 10 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
INPUT SEISMIC
SHOT PROFILES
COFFSTACK
J
COMPUTE
SYNTHETIC
PICK
STORE COMPUTED
AMPLITUDES
AMPLI TUDES
COMPUTE
COMPUTE MODEL
ERROR
PARAMETER CHANGE
USI NG GLI
NO
ERROR
YES
MODEL MATCHES
REAbITY
,
Figure 10.6
AVO inversion by the GLI method
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset
Inversion
Page 10 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Wewill nowlook at an example of GLI inversion of
offset
data.
amplitude versus
First, consider the integrated well logs shownon the left hand
panel of Figure 10.7. Actually., only the sonic log or Pwavelog wasrecorded
in the field. The density log was derived from the sonic using Gardner's
equation, the Potssonratio wasfixed at 0.25, and the Swavewasderived from
the
Pwave and Potsson ratio logs.
On the logs, three
layers
have been
blocked at depth and a significant Poisson's ratio changehas been introduced
in the middle block. On the right hand side of Figure 10.7, notice that the
amplitudeversusoffset curves have been displayed for the third layer. As
predicted earlier, the Pwave reflection coefficient displays a strong
increase of amplitude with offset.
Figure 10.8 showsthe sameset of blockedlogs on the left, but showsthe
seismic responseof the amplitude change on the right. This synthetic was
produced
by simply'replacingthe zeroincidenceamplitudeswith the amplitudes
derived from the Zoeppritz calculations.
The events between600 and 700 msec
display a pronounced
amplitude changewit h offset.
ZOEPPRII'Z
$IHI:LE INTERFFJCE
TESTLO
TESTLO
TESi'DE
lES t;$TPO
Eq,
m,nt: 3 Ti,:
$7 Depth: 795
589
1998
Of*f's:c'
..........................
i Reflected
.....
2,5
4;8
PWave
Transmitted PWave(9.8)
......
Ref'l ected
SWave
........... Transmitted SWave
,,,
mm
Figure 10.7 Blockedwell logs on left,
with computedZoeppritz curves
for layer 3 on right.
_
Part 10 ^mplJtude versus Offset InvesJon
Page 10
10
Introducti
on to
Sei smi c Inversi
on Methods
Brian
Russel 1
20EPPRITZ EFLECTIUITY tlODEL
TESTLOG TESTLOG IEH$ITY1
uYm
u/m
9/
......
MODEL1 (meters.)
SI,IFIUE! POISSOH1
EU
usam
,L
909
727
545
363
181
...o..... ............... ,
....,....
ee.
.........................
."
.........
.........
..............
.'.........,.
::
.........................
...
...........
"
268
268
Figure 10.8
2.5
468
LeftRight:
.$
A "blowup"of the blockedlogs shownin Figure 10.7.
A synthetic
commonoffset
stack and the AVO curves
shown on the right of Figure 10.7.
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset Inversion
Page 10
11
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
However, does the change seen in
Brian Russell
Figure 10.8 reflect
the reality
of the
situation?
Figure 10.9 showsa set of CDPgathers which correspond to the
model. The gathers are a realistic modelled dataset and were generatedwith
no changein Poisson's ratio. Since the gathers are noisy and contain fewer
tracesthanthe synthetic
CDP
profile shownin Figure10.8, theywereusedto
create
a commonoffset stack.
The geometry of this st.ack
is
described
in
Ostrander'spaper, and the resulting gathersare often referredto' as
Ostrander gathers. Traces within a CDP/offset window were gathered and
stacked, resulting in increased signal to noise. Figure 10.10 showsa display
of the logs, synthetic model, and common
offset stack. The mismatch in
amplitudes is now obvious.
Next,
the
amplitudes of
the
event on the
contanon offset
stack
correspondingto the event displayed in Figure 10.7 were picked. The event
above the
anomalous layer was also picked.
The picks were then
used along
with the computedamplitude versus offset curve to invert the data by the GLI
method. In the inversion, two parameters were allowed to vary the Poisson's
ratio
in the layer of interest,
and a
scalar
which relates the magnitude of
the seismic
picksto themagnitude
of theactual'amplitudes.
Figure 10.9
CDPgathers from a seismic dataset corresponding to
synthetic shownin Figure 10.8.
Part 10 Amplituae
versus Offset Inversion
Page 10 
12
I ntroducti
onto SeistoicI nversi
onMethods
Bri an Russel
1
I NVER$]ON FULL HOIIEL
TESTL TESTL I)EN$I $WI:IUPOI$$
_ us/m
u/
g/cc
us/
rIO]]EL1 (meters)
EU
909
727
545
353
181
COFFSTK1( n,elers )
838
64
498 :)32
liE;
ItIII
50
I
20
20
2.5
40
Figure 10.10
,5
A comparison of the synthetic coneon offset stack from
Figure 10.8 {middle panel) with a con,nonoffset stack
created from the CDPgathers of Figure 10.9 (right panel).
Te left panel showsthe blocked well logs from which
the synthetic
was created.
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset Inversion
Page l(J
13
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
The results of this inversion are shown in Figure 10.11. The figure
shows
the change
in Poisson's
ratio beforeandafter inversion(dashed
line
before, solid line = after) on the left hand side. Onthe upperright is
shownthe matchbetween
the observed
picksin the upperlayer (shown
as small
squares)
andthefinal theoreticalcurve{sown
asa solidline). Thelower
right showsthe samething for the lower layer.
Finally, Figure10.1Zshowsthe comparison
betweenthe coanon
offset
stackandthe syntheticmodelafter the modelhasbeenrecomputed
with the new
amplitude
changes
fromtheupdated
Poisson's
ratio. Noticethe improvement
in
the
match.
II'RSIOH
SINE
LIER:
I101ELI
Ewnt (2) P.bove Laver
e .e
0.042
6.666
..
O''r
Event (3) Belo4aLaver
0.048
OO
6.624
70O
6,8
Figure 10.11
Poiss
Ratio
e.
6.606
S5e
O('set
( m)
Theresultsof a GLI inversionbetween
the computed,
amplitudes
of Figure10.7andthepickedamplitudes
fromtheconmon
offset stackof Figure10.10. Thedashed
line onthe plot
onthe left is the Poisson'sratio beforeinversion,andthe
solid line is after inversion. Theplots on the right show
the newcomputed
curveswiththe picks(squares)
superimposed.
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset Inversion
Page 10
14
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
IHUER$IOH FULL MODL
MOIlEL2(meer$)
EU
Figure 10.12
909
727
545
363
COFFSTKI ( meters )
lB1
838
664
498
332
166
A replot of Figure 10.10, where the synthetic has been
recomputedusing the newPoisson's ratio value.
Part 10  Amplitude versus Offset
Inversion
Page 10 
15
[ntoduct
on t $e smc [nvesJ on Methods
B an Russe ]
PART 11  VEI:OCITY INVERSION
Part 11  Velocity
Inversion
Page 11 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Part 11  Veloci..tyI.n.v.
ersi on
__
11.1
! ntroduc ti on
The
last
inversion.
topic to be discussedin these notes is the topic of velocity
Alth
acutally
fit
ough this technique is
referred
to as inversion, it does not
in to the narrower category of inversion techniques that we have
been dtscussing in this course. These techniqueshaveall involved inputting
a stacked, or unstacked, seismic dataset and inverting to a velocity
depth section.
seismic
The output of
section
amplitudes,
the
velocity
inversion
properly positioneU in depth, but still
and still
bandlimiteU.
versus
described here is the
plotted
as seismic
As such this technique is closer
to that
of depth migration.
In
this
section,
we will
inversion, and then look at a
this
at
few examples.
the theory of
summary. Our discussion here will
11
 Velocity
Inversion
and
there
follow
velocity
An excellent review article
subject is given in Bleistein and Cohen(1982).
theory of the method is reviewed
Part
look briefly
is
In this
article,
also an extensive
on
the
literature
that article.
Page 11 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
KII.OFET
2
1
KILOFEET
2
I
(a)
Figure 11.1
(b)
The effect of the velocity inversion methodon synthetic
data. (a) A "buried focus"effect, (b) The output from
the velocity
inversion
method.
(Bleistein
KILOFEET
o
1
C)
and Cohen 1982 )
KILOFEET
o
ii'1
uJ
LL
m
o
....
(a)
Figure 11.2
(b)
A second example of the effect
synthetic data.
of velocity
inversion on
(a) Input section with diffraction,
(b) Output from velocity
inversion.
(Bleistein
and Cohen
1982 )
......
Part 11  Velocity
Inversion
Page 11 
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian
Russell
11.2 Theory and .Examples
The velocity inversion procedure is referred to as an inverse
scattering
problem, in which the interior of the earth is mapped by inver.ting the
observations from multiple acoustic sources. (This is a long way of saying
that the seismic
section
is
inverted!)
method is the acoustic wave equation.
and classical migration is
that
Thus,
the
point for this
The difference between this
perturbation
techniques
transforms are used rather than downwardcontinuation
The initial
starting
technique
and integral
of the wave equation.
work in this area was done by NormanBleistein
and Jack Cohen
at the University of Denver. In their initial
paper, Cohenand Bleistein
(197g), they employed only a perturbation technique in the inversion of
seismic data. In simple terms, this technique involves using a constant
velocity in the wave equation, perturbing this constant velocity by a small
amount, and then, by observing the backscattered wavefield, solving for the
perturbed velocity.
This methodsolves for only the reflection
strength
of
the mappedinterfaces.
In their morerecent paper, Bleistein
solution
was proposed which al.so solves for
refraction.
inversion
and Cohen(1982), a moreaccurate
Clayton and Stolt
of
seismic
data.
(1981)
Their
transmission losses
and
have applied a similar methodto the
method is referred
to as
the
BornWKBJ
method, and thus this approach to inversion is often cal led Born inversion.
Despite the differences in the mathematicsbetweenthe velocity inversion
methodsand migration methods, the results look very similar to those of
migration. For example,Figure 11.1, fromBleistein andCohen(1982), shows
the input an inverted
result
for
a gD buried focus.
Note that, as in
migration, the "bowtie" has been imagedto a synclinal feature.
Part 11  Velocity
Inversion
Page 11 
Introduction
o Seismic Inversion
q ! ()f!. []
I,;,(11). iJ
ll;11]ll. ()
Methods
I I 3l)!]. l,
Brian Russell
I ;i'llroll. IJ.
I I,I O0. II
I I11.)[11J. fl
(a)
qlOO
..,,
6500
8900
I 1 300

1 37.r.,P
16' ,'!..[]
18bG
c)
(b)
Figure 11.3
The effect
of velocity
inversion on real data.
(a) Input section (MarathonOil),
() Output section.
(Bleistein
Part 11  Velocity Inversion
and Cohen 1982)
Page11 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Figure 11.2, also from Bleistein and Cohen (1982), showstle velocity
inversion of a diffraction tail from a geological discontinuity. Notice that
the diffraction tail has been "collapsea", again as in migration.
Finally, Figure 11.3 showsan example of applying the velocity inversion
techniqueto a real dataset. Again, note the similarity with classical depth
migration. The fact that this section is plotted as wiggle trace only makes
the plot di fficul t to evaluate.
In summary,this technique cannotbe classed with the other methodswhich
have been discussed in this'course due to its similarity with depth migration.
However, research in'this
area is continuing at a steady pace, and the
technique promises much for the future.
Part
11  Velocity
I nversion
Page11 
Introduction to Seismic Inversion Nethods
Brian Russell
PART 12  SUMMARY
Part 12  Summary
Page 12 
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
lZ.1 Sgmmary
In
inversion
these
notes,
we have
of seismic data.
reviewed the current
The basic
model
methods used
in
the
used in most of these methods is
the onedimensionalmodel, which states that the seismic trace is simply the
convolution of a zero phase wavelet
the
earth's
acoustic
shownin Figures
with a reflectivity
impedanceprofile.
12.1,
12.2,
sequence derived from
Flowcharts for these methoUs are
and 12.3.
Let
us initially
summarizethe
advantages and disadvantages of the three methodsof single trace
which
inversion
have been discussed:
(1) Recursire
_
Inversion
Advantage s:
(i)
Utilizes
the complete seismic trace in its calculation.
(l i ) A robust procedure when used on clean seismic data.
(iii)
Output is in wiggle trace format similar
to seismic data.
Di sadvantages:
(i)
Errors
are
propagated through the recurslye solution
if there are
phase, amplitude, or noise problems.
(i i) The low frequency componentmust be derived from a separate source.
(2) Spar.
seSP.i
kg_.Invers.
ion
Advantages
(i)
The data
itself
is
used in
the
calculation,
as
in
recursi
ve
i nver si on.
(ii)
(iii)
A geological looking inversion is produced.
The low frequency information
is included mathematically
in
solution.
Part 12  Summary
Page 12
the
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
BANDLIMITED
SEISMIC
TRACE
INTRODUCE
LOW
FREQUENCY
COMPONENT
REFL
COEFF.
INVERT
TOIMPEDANCE
IMPEDANCE
SCALE TO
VELOCITY
AND DEPTH
DISPLAY
Fiure
12.1
BandLimited
Inversion
(Recursive)
Part
12  Summary
Page 12
Introduction
to Seismic
Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
Dsadvantages'
Statistical
(i)
nature of the sparsespike methodsused are subject to
probl eros i n noisy Uata.
Final output lacks muchof the fine detail seen on recursively
inverted data. Only the "blocky" componentis inverted.
(3) ModelBase I nver si on
Advantages'
(i) A complete solution, including low frequencyinformation, is possible
to
(ii)
ob rain.
Errors are distributed
(iii)
through the solution.
Multiple and attenuation effects can be modelled.
Di sadvantages'
(i) A completesolution is arrived at iteratively andmayneverbe
reached ( i.e. the solution maynot converge).
It is possible that more than one forward modelcorrectly fits
data (nonuniqueness).
(ii)
The
other
methods which
were considered
were
traveltime
the
inversion,
velocity inversion, and amplitude versus offset inversion. All are important
methods, but cannot be compareddirectly with the three previous methods
(comparingapples with oranges?).
,
The traveltime
accurate velocity
constraint
for
either
inversion
method was
an excellent
versus depth model. These velocities
one of
the
classical
method for finding an
make
an
excellent
inversion methodsor for a depth
migration.
Part
12  Summary
Page 12 
Introductionto SeismicInversionMethods
BrianRussell
EXTRACT
SPARSE
REFLECTIVITY
INTRODUCE
LINEAR
CONSTRAINTS
INVERT
TO IMPEDANCE
vELcmTY!
DL_._.
AND
m
Fiure
Part 12  Sugary
12.2
BroadBandInversion (SparseSpike)
Page 12
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion
Methods
Brian Russell
The velocity inversion methodwas shownto be very similar to depth
migration. The output from this method could therefore be used as input to
one of the other
Finally,
three
classical
amplitude versus offset inversion adds an extra dimension to the
inversion problem since it
velocity
future,
methods of inversion.
inversion
but still
is
method.
truly
This
has a number of
a lithologic
inversion
method is definitely
hurdles
the
rather than a
method of
the
to overcome. This author's humble
opinion is that once the interpreter is able to do a complete lithological
inversion on their seismic datasets, the other methodswill be replaced.
The other conclusion from this course is that the more separate datasets
(surface seismic, VSP, well log, gravity, etc..) the interpreter can use in an
inversion,
the better
Part 12  Sumnary
the final
product will
be.
Page 12
Introduction
to Seismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
MODEL
TRACE
CALCULATE
ERROR
ERROR
SMALL
ENOUGH
IMPEDANCE
ESTIMATE
UPDATE
IMPEDANCE
NO
YES
ON
=ESTIMATE
Fiure
Part 1' '"
....
Summary
12.3
Mode 1Based
Inversion
Page 12
Introduction
to Sei stoic Inversion
Herhods
Brian Russell
REFERENCES
Angeleri, G.P., and Carpi, R., 1982, Porosity prediction from
seismic data'
Geophys.Prosp., v.30, p.$80607.
Berteussen, K.A., and Ursin, B., 1983, Approximate computation of
the acoustic impedancefrom seismic datap.
Geophysics, v. 48,
13511358.
Bishop, T.N.,
Bube, K.P., Cutler,
Resnick, J.R.,
Shuey, R.T.,
R.T., Langan, RT., Love, P.L.,
SpinUler,
Tomographic determination of velocity
D.A., and Wyld, H.W., 1985,
and depth in laterally
varying media Geophysics, v. 50, p. 903Bleistein,
N., and Cohen, J.K.,
Present status,
Bording, R.P.,
198, The velocity inversion problem
new directions:
Lines, L.R.,
923.
Geophysics, v.47. p.14971511.
Scales, J.A.,
ana Treitel,
S., 1986,
Principles of travel time tomography' SEGContinuing EUucation notes,
Geophysical inversion and applications.
Chi, C., Mendel, J.M., and Hampson,D., 1984, A computationally fast
approach to maximumlikelihood aleconvolution:
p.
Geophysics, v. 49,
550565.
Chiu, S.K.,
and Stewart,
R.R.,
dimensional seismic velocity
seismic profiles,
1987, Tomographic determination
structure
of three
using well logs, vertical
and surface seismic data:
Geophysics, v.52,
p. 10851098.
Claerbout,
J.F.,
and Muir, F.,
Geophysics, v. 38, p.
Part 12  Summary
1973, Robust Modeling with erratic
data:
8Z6844.
Page 12 
Introduction
Clayton,
to Seismic Inversion Methods
R.W., and Stolt,
acoustic reflection
Cohen, J.K.,
R.H.,
data:
and Bleistein,
Brian Russell
1981, A born WKBJinversion
Geophysics, v. 46,
method for
15591568.
N, 1979, Velocity inversion procedure for
acoustic waves: Geophysics, v. 44, p. 10771087.
Cooke, D.A.,
and Schneider, W.A., 1983, Generalized linear
of reflection
Galbraith,
J.M.,
seismic data:
and Millington,
Geophysics, v. 48, p.
G.F.,
inversion
665676.
1979, Low frequency recovery in
the inversion of seismograms: Journal of the CSEG, V. 15, p. 3039.
Gelland, V., and Larner, K., 1983, Seismic litholic
modeling:
presented at the 1983 convention of the CSEG,Las Vegas.
Graul, M., Deconvolution and wavelet processing:
Unpubished SEG course
notes.
Hardage, R., 1986, Seismic Stratigraphy:
London
Geophysical Press,
 Amsterdam.
.Hampson,
D., and Galbraith, M., 1981, Wavelet extraction by soniclog
correltation:
Journal of the CSEG, v. 17, p. 24
Hampson, D., 1986, Inverse velocity
Journal of the CSEG, V. 22, p.
Hampson, D., and Russell,
42.
stacking for multiple
elimination:
4455.
B., 1985, MaximumLikelihood seismic
inversion (abstract no. SP16) National CanauianCSEGmeeting,
Ca.!gary, Alberta.
Part 12  Summary
Page 12 
Introducti on to Sei stoic Inversi on Methods
Bri an Russell
.
Herman, A.J.,
Anania, R.M., Chun, J.H.,
Jacewitz,
C.A.,
and
Pepper, R.E.F., 1982, A fast threedimensionalmodeling technique
and fundamentals of threedimensional frequencyUomainmigration:
Geophysics, v. 47, p.
Jones, I.F.,
16271644.
and Levy, S., 1987, Signal=tonoise ratio enhancementin
multi channel seismic data via the KarhunenLoeve transform,
Geophysical Propecting, v. 35, p.
Kormyl o, J.,
anu Mendel., J.M.,
deconvolution
IEEE Trans.
1232.
1983, Maximumlikelihood seismic
on Geoscience and Remote Sensing,
v. IT  28, p. 482  488.
Lines, L.R.,
Schultz, A.K., and Treitel,
of geophysical data:
Lines, L.R.,
Geophysics, v. 53, p. 8
and Tritel,
anU its application
S., 1988, Cooperative inversion
S.,
1984, A review of leastsquares
to geophysical problems'
Prospecting, v. 32, p.
20.
inversion
Geophysical
159186.
Lindseth, R.O., 1979, Synthetic sonic logs  a process for stratigraphic
interpretation:
Geophysics, v. 44, p. 3
26.
Oldenburg, D.W., 1985, Inverse theory with applica.tion to aleconvolution
and seismogram inversion.
Oldenburg, D.W., Scheuer, T.,
impedancefrom reflection
Ostrander,
W.J.,
Unpublished course notes.
and Levy, S., 1983, Recovery of the acoustic
seismograms:Geophysics, v. 48, p. 13181337.
1984, Plane wave reflection
at nonnormal angles of incidence:
Part 12  Summary
coefficients
for gas sands
Geophysics, v. 49, p. 16371648.
Page 12 
10
Introduction %oSeismic Inversion Methods
Brian Russell
Russell, B.H., and Lindseth, R.O., 1982, The information content of
synthetic sonic logs  A frequencydomainapproach presentedat
the 1982 convention of the EAEG, Cannes, France.
Shuey,R.T., 1985, A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations:
Geophysics,v. 50, p. 609614.
Stewart, R.R., andChiu, S.K.L., 1986, Tomographybased
imagingof a
heavyoil reservoir usingwelllogs, VSPand3D SeismicdataJournal of the CSEG, v. 22, p.
7386.
Taner, M.T., an Koehler, F., 1981,
Geophysics,v. 46, p. 1722.
Surface
consistent
corrections
Taylor, H.L., Banks,S.C., and McCoy,J.F., 1979, Deconvolutionwith
the L1 norm: Geophysics,v. 44, p.
3952.
Trei tel, S., and Robinson,E.A., 1966, The design of hi ghresolution
digital filters IEEETransactions
on Geocience
Electronics,
v. GE4, No. 1, p.
2538.
Walker, C., and Ulrych, T.J., 1983, Autoregressive recovery of the
acoustic impedanceGeophysics,v. 48, p. 1338 1350.
1981, Reflecti on seismology, a tool for energy resource
Waters, K.H.,
(second edition)
exploration
Wiley, NewYork.
Western Geophysical Co., 1983, Sei smic Li thol ogic MoUeli ng:
Technical
Brochure.
Widess, M.B., 1973, How thin is a thin bed? Geophysics, v. 38,
p. 1176
Part
1180.
12  Summary
Page 12 
11
ISBN: 9780931830655
90000
306
ISBN 9780931830488
ISBN 9780931830655
(Series)
(Volume)