Seismic data denoising through multiscale and sparsity-promoting dictionary learning

Seismic data comprise many traces that provide a spatiotemporal sampling of the reflected wavefield. However, such information maysuffer from ambient and random noise during acquisition, which could possibly limit the use of seismic data in reservoir locating. Traditionally, fixed transforms are used to separate the noise from the data by exploiting their different characteristics in a transform domain. However, their performance may not be satisfactory due to their lack of adaptability to changing data structures. We have developed a novel seismic data denoising method based on a parametric dictionary learning scheme. Unlike previous dictionary learning methods that had to learn unconstrained atoms, our method exploits the underlying sparse structure of the learned atoms over a base dictionary and significantly reduces the dictionary elements that need to be learned. By combining the advantages of multiscale representations with the power of dictionary learning, more degrees of freedom could be provided to the sparse representation, and therefore the characteristics of seismic data could be efficiently captured in sparse coefficients for denoising. The dictionary learning and denoising were processed from all overlapping patches of the given noisy seismic data, which maintained low complexity. Numerical experiments on synthetic seismic data indicated that our scheme achieved the best denoising performance in terms of peak signal-to-noise ratio and minimizes visual distortion.

[1]  L. Canales Random Noise Reduction , 1984 .

[2]  Michael Elad,et al.  Image Denoising Via Sparse and Redundant Representations Over Learned Dictionaries , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[3]  S. Shankar Sastry,et al.  Generalized Principal Component Analysis , 2016, Interdisciplinary applied mathematics.

[4]  John Etgen,et al.  Strike shooting, dip shooting, widepatch shooting — Does prestack depth migration care? A model study , 1998 .

[5]  James C. Bezdek,et al.  Some Notes on Alternating Optimization , 2002, AFSS.

[6]  D. Donoho For most large underdetermined systems of linear equations the minimal 𝓁1‐norm solution is also the sparsest solution , 2006 .

[7]  Michael A. Saunders,et al.  Atomic Decomposition by Basis Pursuit , 1998, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[8]  Michael P. Friedlander,et al.  Probing the Pareto Frontier for Basis Pursuit Solutions , 2008, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[9]  Yangkang Chen,et al.  Random noise attenuation by f-x empirical mode decomposition predictive filtering , 2014 .

[10]  Michael Elad,et al.  Sparse Representation for Color Image Restoration , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[11]  Thomas S. Huang,et al.  Image super-resolution as sparse representation of raw image patches , 2008, 2008 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[12]  P. E. Harris,et al.  Improving the performance of f-x prediction filtering at low signal-to-noise ratios , 1997 .

[13]  Jianwei Ma,et al.  Seismic data denoising based on learning-type overcomplete dictionaries , 2012, Applied Geophysics.

[14]  Guochang Liu,et al.  Stacking seismic data using local correlation , 2009 .

[15]  A. Bruckstein,et al.  K-SVD : An Algorithm for Designing of Overcomplete Dictionaries for Sparse Representation , 2005 .

[16]  F. Herrmann,et al.  Nonequispaced curvelet transform for seismic data reconstruction: A sparsity-promoting approach , 2010 .

[17]  M. Sacchi,et al.  Eliminating Blending Noise Using Fast Apex Shifted Hyperbolic Radon Transform , 2014 .

[18]  E. Candès,et al.  New tight frames of curvelets and optimal representations of objects with piecewise C2 singularities , 2004 .

[19]  Nicholas A Alexander,et al.  An approach to seismic correction which includes wavelet de-noising , 2002 .

[20]  M. Elad,et al.  $rm K$-SVD: An Algorithm for Designing Overcomplete Dictionaries for Sparse Representation , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[21]  Kjersti Engan,et al.  Method of optimal directions for frame design , 1999, 1999 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing. Proceedings. ICASSP99 (Cat. No.99CH36258).

[22]  Felix J. Herrmann,et al.  Seismic denoising with nonuniformly sampled curvelets , 2006, Computing in Science & Engineering.

[23]  T. Ulrych,et al.  Physical Wavelet Frame Denoising , 2003 .

[24]  Necati Gulunay,et al.  FXDECON and complex wiener prediction filter , 1986 .

[25]  Jingye Li,et al.  Seismic noise attenuation using nonstationary polynomial fitting , 2011 .

[26]  Jianwei Ma,et al.  Simultaneous dictionary learning and denoising for seismic data , 2014 .

[27]  S. Shankar Sastry,et al.  Generalized principal component analysis (GPCA) , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[28]  A. Tsoi,et al.  Improving the Performance of the , 2007 .

[29]  Jinghuai Gao,et al.  Separation of seismic blended data by sparse inversion over dictionary learning , 2014 .

[30]  J. Ji CGG method for robust inversion and its application to velocity-stack inversion , 2006 .

[31]  Minh N. Do,et al.  Ieee Transactions on Image Processing the Contourlet Transform: an Efficient Directional Multiresolution Image Representation , 2022 .

[32]  Laurent Demanet,et al.  Fast Discrete Curvelet Transforms , 2006, Multiscale Model. Simul..

[33]  R. Neelamani,et al.  Coherent and random noise attenuation using the curvelet transform , 2008 .

[34]  Michael Elad,et al.  Double Sparsity: Learning Sparse Dictionaries for Sparse Signal Approximation , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[35]  Mauricio D. Sacchi,et al.  Simultaneous source separation using a robust Radon transform , 2014 .

[36]  J. Claerbout,et al.  Lateral prediction for noise attenuation by t-x and f-x techniques , 1995 .

[37]  I. Jolliffe Principal Component Analysis , 2002 .

[38]  E. Candès,et al.  The curvelet representation of wave propagators is optimally sparse , 2004, math/0407210.