Seismic attenuation imaging with causality

Seismic data enable imaging of the Earth, not only of velocity and density but also of attenuation contrasts. Unfortunately, the Born approximation of the constant-density visco-acoustic wave equation, which can serve as a forward modelling operator related to seismic migration, exhibits an ambiguity when attenuation is included. Different scattering models involving velocity and attenuation perturbations may provide nearly identical data. This result was obtained earlier for scatterers that did not contain a correction term for causality. Such a term leads to dispersion when considering a range of frequencies. We demonstrate that with this term, linearized inversion or iterative migration will almost, but not fully, remove the ambiguity. We also investigate if attenuation imaging suffers from the same ambiguity when using non-linear or full waveform inversion. A numerical experiment shows that non-linear inversion with causality convergences to the true model, whereas without causality, a substantial difference with the true model remains even after a very large number of iterations. For both linearized and non-linear inversion, the initial update in a gradient-based optimization scheme that minimizes the difference between modelled and observed data is still affected by the ambiguity and does not provide a good result. This first update corresponds to a classic migration operation. In our numerical experiments, the reconstructed model started to approximate the true model only after a large number of iterations.

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

[2]  Detecting near-surface objects with seismic waveform tomography , 2009 .

[3]  C. Shin,et al.  An optimal 9-point, finite-difference, frequency-space, 2-D scalar wave extrapolator , 1996 .

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

[5]  K. Aki,et al.  Quantitative Seismology, 2nd Ed. , 2002 .

[6]  R. G. Pratt,et al.  Waveform Tomography Strategies for Imaging Attenuation Structure with Cross-hole Data , 2008 .

[7]  R. Pratt,et al.  Reflection waveform inversion using local descent methods: Estimating attenuation and velocity over a gas-sand deposit , 2001 .

[8]  W. Mulder,et al.  Migration for velocity and attenuation perturbations , 2010 .

[9]  Kurt J. Marfurt,et al.  The Future of Iterative Modeling in Geophysical Exploration , 1989 .

[10]  W. A. Mulder,et al.  A comparison between one-way and two-way wave-equation migration , 2004 .

[11]  A. Weglein,et al.  On the construction of an absorptive–dispersive medium model via direct linear inversion of reflected seismic primaries , 2007 .

[12]  A. Hanyga,et al.  Some effects of the memory kernel singularity on wave propagation and inversion in viscoelastic media - II. Inversion , 2004 .

[13]  J. Virieux,et al.  Asymptotic theory for imaging the attenuation factor Q , 1998 .

[14]  Wim A. Mulder,et al.  An ambiguity in attenuation scattering imaging , 2009 .

[15]  R. Plessix,et al.  Finite-difference Iterative Migration By Linearized Waveform Inversion In the Frequency Domain , 2002 .

[16]  E. Turkel,et al.  Operated by Universities Space Research AssociationAccurate Finite Difference Methods for Time-harmonic Wave Propagation* , 1994 .

[17]  Jean Virieux,et al.  Asymptotic viscoacoustic diffraction tomography of ultrasonic laboratory data: a tool for rock properties analysis , 2000 .

[18]  J. Pasciak,et al.  Computer solution of large sparse positive definite systems , 1982 .