A correlation-based misfit criterion for wave-equation traveltime tomography

By Tristan van Leeuwen, Wim A. Mulder. 2010

225 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Wave-equation traveltime tomography tries to obtain a subsurface velocity model from seismic data, either passive or active, that explains their traveltimes. A key step is the extraction of traveltime differences, or relative phase shifts, between observed and modelled finite-frequency waveforms. A standard approach involves a correlation of the observed and measured waveforms. When the amplitude spectra of the waveforms are identical, the maximum of the correlation is indicative of the relative phase shift. When the amplitude spectra are not identical, however, this argument is no longer valid. We propose an alternative criterion to measure the relative phase shift. This misfit criterion is a weighted norm of the correlation and is less sensitive to differences in the amplitude spectra. For practical application it is important to use a sensitivity kernel that is consistent with the way the misfit is measured. We derive this sensitivity kernel and show how it differs from the standard banana–doughnut sensitivity kernel. We illustrate the approach on a cross-well data set.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Geophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2b830a494ad49681b1fdb6a0b0268036ad798928

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Geophysics

Citations in the corpus

Application of the Wasserstein metric to seismic signals (2013, background): “This can be done in the time domain or, more recently, by different measures of the phase shift; see for example [17].”
Mitigating local minima in full-waveform inversion by expanding the search space (2013, background): “…near to far offsets (Virieux & Operto 2009) or small to large Laplace damping parameters (Shin & Cha 2009) and different misfit functionals (Cara & Lévêque 1987; Luo & Schuster 1991; Gee & Jordan 1992; Fichtner et al. 2008; van Leeuwen & Mulder 2010; Bozdag et al. 2011; Moghaddam & Mulder 2012).”
Adaptive waveform inversion: Theory (2014, methodology): “Symes (2008) and van Leeuwen and Mulder (2010) discuss strategies for choosing a particular form for T in applications of this kind; we have not, however, found AWI to be especially sensitive to the exact form of T. Equation 4 works by penalizing Wiener coefficients at large lags, and the penalty…”
Resolution analysis in full waveform inversion (2011, background): “…the strongly application-specific misfit measures are applicable to complete seismograms, without being necessarily related to isolated phases for which seismic rays can be computed (e.g. Crase et al. 1990; Fichtner et al. 2008; Brossier et al. 2010; van Leeuwen & Mulder 2010; Bozdağ et al. 2011).”