You are on page 1of 17

org/

[ntroductJon

Part

to Seismic Inversion

8 - Model-based
-

Inversion
_
-

Methods

m
m
L

Bran Russel

....

Page 8 -

Introduction

8.1

to Seismic

Introducti

In the

information

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

on

past

sections

directly

of

the

course,

we have derived

reflectivi-ty

inversion to

## We have also seen that these

methods can be severely affected by noise, poor amplitude recovery, and the
band-limited nature of seismic data.
will

be included

In
first

in

the

final

inversion

our

approac is

intuitively
data

itself.

seismic data.

this

result.

results of tis

of

Notice

that

update

this

method is

## very appealing since it avoids the airect inversion of the seismic

On the other hand, it may be possible to come up with a model

that matchesthe data'very well, but is incorrect. (This can be seen easily
by noting that there are infinitely manyvelocity/depth pairs that will result
in the sametime value.) This is referred to as the problem of nonuniqueness.
To implement the approach shown in
fundamental questions.

First,

Figure 8.1,

Second,

between

## shall consider two approaches

to theseproblems,the generalizedlinear
inversion (GLI) approach outlined in CooRe and Schneider (1983}, and the
Seismic Lithologic
(SLIM) method which was developed in Gelland and Larner
(1983).

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods'

Brian

Russell

CALCULATE
UPDATE
IMPEDANCE

ERROR

ERROR
SMALL
ENOUGH

NO

YES

SOLUTION
= ESTIMATE

Figure 8.1

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

technique.

Page 8 -

Introduction

8.2

%o Seismic

Generalized

Linear

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

Inversion

## The generalized linear inversion(GLI) method is a methodwich can be.

applied to virtually any set of geophysicalmeasurementsto determine the
geologicalsituation whichproduced these results. That is, given a set of
geophysicalobservations, the GLI method
will derive the geological model
which best fits

tese observations in a

Mathematically,

## if we express the model and observations as vectors

M:(m
1,m
2, ..... , mk)
T=vector
ofkmodel
parameters,
and
T: (t1,t2, ..... , tn)T:
functional

of n observations.

in the

vector

form

Once

the

functional

relationship

i : 1, ...

, n.

between

the

produce an

## output. But what model?GLI eliminatesthe needfor trial

and error by

analyzing the error betweenthe model output and the observations, and then
perturbing the model parameters in such a way as to produce an output which
will produceless error.
In this way, we may iterate towards a solution.
Mathematically'
F(M)

)F(MO)

= F(Mo)+ aT

M,

MO-Initialodel,

where

M:

AM:

## changein model parameters,

F(M) : observations,

F(Mo):calculated
valuesfrominitial

model, and

)F(M
O)

.2

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

= change
in calculated
values.

Page 8 -

Brian Russell

IMPEDANCE

(GM/CM3)(FT/SEC)
X1000

IMPEDANCE

4.6

41.5AMPLITUDE

41.5 4.6

ml

41.5 4.6

41.5

ii

,i

i,

ii

:.
__

Figure 8.2

A synthetic

inversion.

## (a) Input impedance. (b) Reflectivity derived from (a)

with added multiples. (c) Recurslye inversion of (b).
(d) Recurslye

inversion

of (b)convolved

Part

8 - Model-based

I nversi on

with wavelet.

## (Cooke and Schneider, 1983)

Page 8 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

But note that the error between the observations and the computed values

i s simply

F = F(M)- F(MO).
Therefore,

## the above equation can be re expressed as a matrix equation

F

where

= A AM,

A:

matrix
with

of deri vatives
n rows anU k columns.

-1

= A

## where A-l: matrixinverseof A.

F,

However, since there are usually more observations than parameters (that

therefore

does

not

than k)

have

the matrix A is

true

inverse.

This

is

referred

to

as

an

## squares solution often referred to as the Marquart-Levenburg

method(see Lines
and Treitel

(1984)).

The solution

is given by

M: (AT'A)-IA
TZF.
Figure 8.1 can be thought of as a flowchart of the GLI methodif we make
the impedanceupdate using the methodjust described. However, we still must
derive

the

observations.
convol utional

functional

relationship

The simplest

necessary to relate

solution

the

## which presents itself

model to

the

is the standarO

model

s(t)

= w(t) * r(t),

where r(t)

= primaries only.

Cooke and Schneider (1983) use a modilied version of the previous formula

in which multiples

## single synthetic impedance trace.

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

'

Russell

IMP.EDANCE
x1OOO

(GM/CM3)(FT/\$EC)

._
,.o

. .:-:

. .:.

,, ,,

. . .....

. .:.........::
:...., ...... .. :...lO
? "e'.

: :........:..:.-.-_-

........

,,

, ....-.

-.

4':
-':::./-.:.!i!i..::..':..
:.:......:.':ii.'-'-:..
:.....
'......'..'..
:.' }::!
- ..'.:"

'

300M\$

Figure 8.3

## The well on the right

encountersa gas sand while the well on the left does not.
(Cooke and Schneider, 1983)
IMPEDANCE

AMPLITUDE

(GM/CM3! (FT/SEC)X1000
10

,,,.l

Figure 8.4

Model

traces

derived

from

## m)del in Figure 8.3.

{Cooke and Sc)neider, 1983)

Figure 8.5

38 10

38

## GLI inversion of model traces.

Compare
with sonic log on right side of Fiiure 8.3.
(Cooke and Schneider, 1983)
Page 8 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Brian

Russell

## In Figure 8.2, notice that the advantage of incorporating multiples in

the solution is that, although they are modelled in couting
the seismic

## response,they are not included in the model parameters. This is a big

advantage over recursire methods, since those methods incorporate
multiples into the solution if they are not removedfrom the section.
Another

important

feature

of

this

particular

method is

the

the

## parameterizationused. Instead of assigninga different value of velocity at

each time sample, large

time.

This

## Each block was

and a thickness in

simplified

the

to

derive a fairly

Wewill

## now look at both a

syntheticandreal examplefromCookeandSchneider(1983).
A 2-0 synthetic example was next considered by Cooke and Schneider
(1983). Figure 8.3 showsthe model, which consisted of two gas sands encased
in shale.

The impedance

## profile of the discovery well is shownon the right.

Figure 8.4 shows
synthetic traces over the two wells, in which a noise component
has been

Finally,

final

solution,

## for which the gradients have been set to zero.

Notice that although the
solution is not perfect, the gas sand has been delineated.

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

Brian Russell

YES

_____J
' '

- _

FINALMObEL

._ x,

.... r - ;,

-.-'%..

-cx-r.
.,'_;'.:.
-, . . . .. .-.
t ...

Figure 8.6

I11 ustrated

flow chart

for

## the SLIM method.

(Western GeophysicalBrochure)

Page 8 -

! ntroducti

## on to Sei stoic !nver si on Methods

Brian

Russel 1

8.3 Sei_smic
L_ithologicModelling(,SLIM)
Although the nthod outlined in Cookeand Schneider (1983)
promise, it has not,
commercially.

as

far

However,

fully

released,

than

the

direct

of

a seismic

flowchart

the

layers

of

variable

similar

and

is

perturbation

of

the

## as in the GLI method, an initial

velocity,

Also, the

of a model rather

section.

of

very

inversion

Notice that,

## aware, been implemented

appears

Seismic Lithologic

brochure.

author is

## commercially available is the

Western Geophysical.

as this

showed much

density,

geological model is

and thickness at

various

control

supplied (from a

## previous wavelet extraction procedure) or is estimated from the data.

synthetic model is then comparedwith

the

The

## seismic data and the least-squared

error sum is computed. The model is perturbed in such a way as to reduce the
error,

convergence.

## The user has total

geological information

## control over the constraints and may incorporate

from any source. The major advantage of this method

over classical

methods is

recurslye

that

noise

in the seismic

section

is not

## incorporated. However,as in the GLI method,thesolution is nonunique.

The best examples of

initial

applying

this

method to

boundaries

of

sonic log.

data

to

be

Page 8 -

10

inverted.

Part

8 - Model-based

I nversi

on

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

1kit

,1.4

1.4

1.6

2.0

2.0

Stack

Initial
Figure 8.7

## Left' Init)al Denver

Basinmodelseismic.
Right: Stacked section from DenverBasin.
(Gelfand andLarner, 1983).

lkft

.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

1.8

Field
data

Synthetic

Figure 8.8

Left:

Reflectivity

## Fna SLIM JnversJon of

Figure 8.7 spl iceU into
Right- Final reflectivity
from
' -- _ -- __--__ii m
' -'
(Gelfand and Larner,
Part 8 - Model-based Inversion

data shown 1n
field data.
inversion.
1983).
..........
Page 8 -

2.0
.m:
11

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

In Figure 8.8 the stack is again shown in its most complexregion, with
the final synthetic data is shownafter 7 iterations through the program.
Notice the excellent agreement. On the right hand sie of Figure 8-.9 is the
final reflectivity section from which the pseudoimpedanceis derived. Since
this reflectivity is "spiy", or broad band, it already contains the low

frequencycomponent
necessary
for full inversion. Finally, Figure 8.10 shows
the final inversion compared

Note the

## 'blocky' nature of the parameterbasedinversion when comparedwith the

recurs i ve i nvers i on.

In

summary,

which can
reflectivity

parameter

be thought
is

of

extracted.

I

## propagatedthroughthe final result

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

model1ing scheme

has the

as in recursire

that

errors

are

not

inversion.

Page 8 -

12

Introduction

to Seismic

Methods

500-ft
N

lkft

Inversion

Brian

114
mile
S

Russell

114
mile
SE

.5

.7

l m

1.9

Figure 8.9

Impedance section

derived

of

W

lkft

50011
N

114mileS

114mileS

1.7

19

Fi gure 8.10

recursire

inversion

## (Gelfana anU Larner, 1983)

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

13

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Appendix
8-!

Methods

Brian

Russell

Mat_r_ix
.appljc.at.
ions_inGeophy.s.ics

## Matrix theory showsup in every aspect of geophysicalproocessing.Before

looking at generalized matrix theory, let us considerthe application of
matrices to

application.

## For example, let

3x1+2x2 : 1, and
x1- x2 = 2.
By inspection, we see that the solution is

A

x1

1 -1

x2

y,

or

## The sol ution

is,

therefore
x

-1

x1
x2

8 - Model-based

Inversion

1 . -2

-1/5

or

Part

y,

Page 8 -

14

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Me.thods

and the

problem terefore

of dimension N.

vector

Brian Russell

fewer

means

equations than

unknowns (in

Generally,

we either

situation

is

have

called

is
is

case
of

little

interest

to

case is

us since

there

is

no unique

solution.

the

The

following

problems:
(!)

Surface

consi stent

## (2) Lithological modelling,and

(3) Refracti on model
1i ng.
The overdetermined system of
categories-

consistent

## equations can be split into two separate

inconsistent.
These are best described
by

an

example.

(a) Cons.i
st Overd..etermined
Lin.earEqua.t.
ion.s

In

this

equations

case

are

we

simply

than

unknowns, but

In

this

the extra

case,

the

## simply be eliminated, reducingthe prlemto the

square matrix case. For examp.le, consider adding a third equation to our
earl ier example,

so that

3x1+2x2 : 1,
x1- x2 : 2,
anU

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

15

Introduction

to Seismic

## This may be written

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

in matrix form as

x1
x

But notice that the third equation is simply five times the second, and
therefore conveys no new information.

We may thus

form.

(b) Inco,
ns,
is,tentOverd.
eermine.
d L.i.near
Equai.on?

extra

versions

of other

## equations-in the set, but conveyconflicting information. In this case, there

is no solution to the problem which will

## solve all the equations.

This is

usually the case in our seismic wor and indicates the presence of measurement
noise and errors.
As an example, consider a modification to the preceding
equations, so that

3x1+2xZ -- 1,
x1- x2 -- Z,

## ana 5x1- \$x2 = 8.

This may be written

in matrix form as

2
-I
-5

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

xI

x2

Page 8 -

16

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

He.thods

Brian

Russell

'Now the third equationis not reducible to either of the other two, ana

an alternate

of

least

solution

## squares, which minimizes the sumof the squared error

and the observed results.

That is,

if

between the
to

e=Ax-y,

n

## eTe-(eI , ez, .......

, en)

ei

Le.
Re expressing the 'preceding equation in terms of the values x, y, and A,
we

have

E = eTe= (y - Ax)T(y
- Ax)

= yTy_ xTATy
_ yTAx
+ xTATAx.
We then solve the equation
bE_

bxi
The final

solution to

the

least-squares

equati OhS

AT
Ax = AT y
or

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

x = (ATA)-lATy
.

Page 8 -

17