Adaptive phase k-means algorithm for waveform classification

Waveform classification is a powerful technique for seismic facies analysis that describes the heterogeneity and compartments within a reservoir. Horizon interpretation is a critical step in waveform classification. However, the horizon often produces inconsistent waveform phase, and thus results in an unsatisfied classification. To alleviate this problem, an adaptive phase waveform classification method called the adaptive phase k-means is introduced in this paper. Our method improves the traditional k-means algorithm using an adaptive phase distance for waveform similarity measure. The proposed distance is a measure with variable phases as it moves from sample to sample along the traces. Model traces are also updated with the best phase interference in the iterative process. Therefore, our method is robust to phase variations caused by the interpretation horizon. We tested the effectiveness of our algorithm by applying it to synthetic and real data. The satisfactory results reveal that the proposed method tolerates certain waveform phase variation and is a good tool for seismic facies analysis. To alleviate the effect of phase in waveform classification, the adaptive phase k-means is introduced for unsupervised seismic facies analysis. This method improves the traditional k-means algorithm by using an adaptive phase distance for waveform similarity measure, and is thus robust to phase variations caused by horizon interpretation.

[1]  Dengliang Gao,et al.  Application of seismic texture model regression to seismic facies characterization and interpretation , 2008 .

[2]  Anil K. Jain Data clustering: 50 years beyond K-means , 2010, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[3]  Yahya Villareal Basman Seismic waveform classification: renewing the interest in Barrolka field, SW Queensland, Cooper Basin , 2015 .

[4]  Arthur E. Barnes,et al.  Hybrid Waveform Classification Applied to Delineate Compartments in a Complex Reservoir in the Malay Basin , 2014 .

[5]  M. Matos,et al.  Unsupervised seismic facies analysis using wavelet transform and self-organizing maps , 2007 .

[6]  Thierry Coléou,et al.  Interpreter's Corner—Unsupervised seismic facies classification: A review and comparison of techniques and implementation , 2003 .

[7]  M. Nafi Toksöz,et al.  Seismic facies classification and identification by competitive neural networks , 2003 .

[8]  Bradley C. Wallet,et al.  Latent space modeling of seismic data An overview , 2009 .

[9]  Dengliang Gao,et al.  Latest developments in seismic texture analysis for subsurface structure, facies, and reservoir characterization: A review , 2011 .

[10]  Kurt J. Marfurt,et al.  Integrated seismic texture segmentation and cluster analysis applied to channel delineation and chert reservoir characterization , 2011 .

[11]  Ya-juan Xue,et al.  Seismic facies analysis based on self-organizing map and empirical mode decomposition , 2015 .

[12]  Paulo Johann,et al.  Reservoir Geophysics: Seismic Pattern Recognition Applied to Ultra-Deepwater Oilfield in Campos Basin, Offshore Brazil , 2001 .

[13]  A. Reynolds,et al.  Application of EM algorithms for seismic facices classification , 2011 .

[14]  Vikram Jayaram,et al.  A comparison of classification techniques for seismic facies recognition , 2015 .

[15]  E. Rankey Interpreter's Corner—That's why it's called interpretation: Impact of horizon uncertainty on seismic attribute analysis , 2003 .

[16]  Kurt J. Marfurt,et al.  Seismic facies analysis using generative topographic mapping , 2014 .

[17]  Anil K. Jain Data clustering: 50 years beyond K-means , 2008, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[18]  Bruce S. Hart,et al.  A visual data-mining methodology for seismic facies analysis: Part 1 — Testing and comparison with other unsupervised clustering methods , 2009 .

[19]  Anatoly Y. Litvinov Reservoir characterization from seismic waveform using forward modeling and pattern recognition , 2002 .