A theory-guided deep-learning formulation and optimization of seismic waveform inversion

Deep-learning techniques appear to be poised to play very important roles in our processing flows for inversion and interpretation of seismic data. The most successful seismic applications of these complex pattern-identifying networks will, presumably, be those that also leverage the deterministic physical models on which we normally base our seismic interpretations. If this is true, algorithms belonging to theory-guided data science, whose aim is roughly this, will have particular applicability in our field. We have developed a theory-designed recurrent neural network (RNN) that allows single- and multidimensional scalar acoustic seismic forward-modeling problems to be set up in terms of its forward propagation. We find that training such a network and updating its weights using measured seismic data then amounts to a solution of the seismic inverse problem and is equivalent to gradient-based seismic full-waveform inversion (FWI). By refining these RNNs in terms of optimization method and learning rate, comparisons are made between standard deep-learning optimization and nonlinear conjugate gradient and limited-memory Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno (L-BFGS) optimized algorithms. Our numerical analysis indicates that adaptive moment (or Adam) optimization with a learning rate set to match the magnitudes of standard FWI updates appears to produce the most stable and well-behaved waveform inversion results, which is reconfirmed by a multidimensional 2D Marmousi experiment. Future waveform RNNs, with additional degrees of freedom, may allow optimal wave propagation rules to be solved for at the same time as medium properties, reducing modeling errors.

[1]  Yangkang Chen,et al.  Automatic microseismic event picking via unsupervised machine learning , 2020, Geophysical Journal International.

[2]  Kristopher A. Innanen,et al.  A theory-guided deep learning formulation of seismic waveform inversion , 2019, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2019.

[3]  Stephen J. Wright,et al.  Numerical Optimization , 2018, Fundamental Statistical Inference.

[4]  Indranil Pan,et al.  Seismic facies analysis using machine learning , 2018, Geophysics.

[5]  Wuyang Yang,et al.  Deep learning for ground-roll noise attenuation , 2018 .

[6]  Sen Liu,et al.  Integrating seismic first-break picking methods with a machine learning approach , 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018.

[7]  Kurt J. Marfurt,et al.  Seismic facies classification using some unsupervised machine-learning methods , 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018.

[8]  Yang Shen,et al.  Seismic trace editing by applying machine learning , 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018.

[9]  Youzuo Lin,et al.  Inversionet: Accurate and efficient seismic-waveform inversion with convolutional neural networks , 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018.

[10]  Jianwei Ma,et al.  Velocity model building with a modified fully convolutional network , 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018.

[11]  Adam D. Halpert Deep learning-enabled seismic image enhancement , 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018.

[12]  K. Innanen,et al.  A 3D pseudospectral method for SH-wave simulation in heterogeneous media , 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018.

[13]  Ulugbek Kamilov,et al.  Efficient and accurate inversion of multiple scattering with deep learning , 2018, Optics express.

[14]  Jianwei Ma,et al.  Intelligent interpolation by Monte Carlo machine learning , 2018 .

[15]  Jinlong Wu,et al.  Physics-informed machine learning approach for augmenting turbulence models: A comprehensive framework , 2018, Physical Review Fluids.

[16]  T. Hansen,et al.  Efficient Monte Carlo sampling of inverse problems using a neural network-based forward—applied to GPR crosshole traveltime inversion , 2017 .

[17]  Anuj Karpatne,et al.  Machine Learning for the Geosciences: Challenges and Opportunities , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[18]  Denes Vigh,et al.  Deep learning prior models from seismic images for full-waveform inversion , 2017 .

[19]  Licheng Zhang,et al.  Machine Learning in Rock Facies Classification: An Application of XGBoost , 2017 .

[20]  Nagiza F. Samatova,et al.  Theory-Guided Data Science: A New Paradigm for Scientific Discovery from Data , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[21]  James M. Rondinelli,et al.  Theory-Guided Machine Learning in Materials Science , 2016, Front. Mater..

[22]  Jinlong Wu,et al.  Physics-informed machine learning approach for reconstructing Reynolds stress modeling discrepancies based on DNS data , 2016, 1606.07987.

[23]  Zheng Xu,et al.  Training Neural Networks Without Gradients: A Scalable ADMM Approach , 2016, ICML.

[24]  Jian Sun,et al.  Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[25]  Thomas Brox,et al.  U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation , 2015, MICCAI.

[26]  Baoli Wang,et al.  A graphics processing unit implementation of time-domain full-waveform inversion , 2015 .

[27]  Xiangang Li,et al.  Constructing long short-term memory based deep recurrent neural networks for large vocabulary speech recognition , 2014, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP).

[28]  James H. Faghmous,et al.  A Big Data Guide to Understanding Climate Change: The Case for Theory-Guided Data Science , 2014, Big Data.

[29]  António E. Ruano,et al.  Seismic detection using support vector machines , 2014, Neurocomputing.

[30]  Navdeep Jaitly,et al.  Hybrid speech recognition with Deep Bidirectional LSTM , 2013, 2013 IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding.

[31]  Ludovic Métivier,et al.  Full Waveform Inversion and the Truncated Newton Method , 2013, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[32]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[33]  Jorge Nocedal,et al.  Remark on “algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound constrained optimization” , 2011, TOMS.

[34]  Timothy A. Davis,et al.  The university of Florida sparse matrix collection , 2011, TOMS.

[35]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Distributed Optimization and Statistical Learning via the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers , 2011, Found. Trends Mach. Learn..

[36]  Yoram Singer,et al.  Adaptive Subgradient Methods for Online Learning and Stochastic Optimization , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[37]  Jean Virieux,et al.  An overview of full-waveform inversion in exploration geophysics , 2009 .

[38]  Michael Dumbser,et al.  Arbitrary high-order finite volume schemes for seismic wave propagation on unstructured meshes in 2D and 3D , 2007 .

[39]  Travis E. Oliphant,et al.  Python for Scientific Computing , 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering.

[40]  J. Tromp,et al.  Finite-Frequency Kernels Based on Adjoint Methods , 2006 .

[41]  R. Plessix A review of the adjoint-state method for computing the gradient of a functional with geophysical applications , 2006 .

[42]  Yee Whye Teh,et al.  A Fast Learning Algorithm for Deep Belief Nets , 2006, Neural Computation.

[43]  J. Carcione,et al.  Seismic modelingSeismic modeling , 2002 .

[44]  Daniel P. W. Ellis,et al.  Connectionist speech recognition of Broadcast News , 2002, Speech Commun..

[45]  Jorge Nocedal,et al.  Algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound-constrained optimization , 1997, TOMS.

[46]  S. Hochreiter,et al.  Long Short-Term Memory , 1997, Neural Computation.

[47]  Ezio Faccioli,et al.  2d and 3D elastic wave propagation by a pseudo-spectral domain decomposition method , 1997 .

[48]  J. Nocedal,et al.  A Limited Memory Algorithm for Bound Constrained Optimization , 1995, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[49]  David J. Thuente,et al.  Line search algorithms with guaranteed sufficient decrease , 1994, TOMS.

[50]  J. Virieux P-SV wave propagation in heterogeneous media: Velocity‐stress finite‐difference method , 1986 .

[51]  A. Tarantola Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation , 1984 .

[52]  K. Marfurt Accuracy of finite-difference and finite-element modeling of the scalar and elastic wave equations , 1984 .

[53]  D. Shanno Conditioning of Quasi-Newton Methods for Function Minimization , 1970 .

[54]  C. G. Broyden The Convergence of a Class of Double-rank Minimization Algorithms 2. The New Algorithm , 1970 .

[55]  Long Chen CONJUGATE GRADIENT METHODS , 2019 .

[56]  Andrew W. Senior,et al.  Long short-term memory recurrent neural network architectures for large scale acoustic modeling , 2014, INTERSPEECH.

[57]  Milos Miljanovic,et al.  Comparative analysis of Recurrent and Finite Impulse Response Neural Networks in Time Series Prediction Author , 2012 .

[58]  Sverre Brandsberg-Dahl,et al.  The Pseudo-analytical Method: Application of Pseudo-Laplacians to Acoustic And Acoustic Anisotropic Wave Propagation , 2009 .

[59]  R. Eymard,et al.  Finite Volume Methods , 2019, Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics.

[60]  Ning Qian,et al.  On the momentum term in gradient descent learning algorithms , 1999, Neural Networks.

[61]  M. N. Shanmukha Swamy,et al.  Graphs: Theory and Algorithms , 1992 .

[62]  G. Smith,et al.  Numerical Solution of Partial Differential Equations: Finite Difference Methods , 1978 .

[63]  R. Fletcher,et al.  A New Approach to Variable Metric Algorithms , 1970, Comput. J..

[64]  D. Goldfarb A family of variable-metric methods derived by variational means , 1970 .