SPECIAL

L a t i nSECTION:
A m e r L
iactai n A m e r i c a

Integration of rock physics, seismic inversion, and

support vector machines for reservoir characterization
in the Orinoco Oil Belt, Venezuela
Downloaded 07/08/14 to 195.53.125.134. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

ATILIO TORRES, formerly Universidad Central de Venezuela; currently PDVSA

JORGE REVERN, formerly PDVSA-Intevep; currently Repsol Exploration

Abstract probabilistic (e.g., Bayes rule) methods, deriving lithologic

Commonly, the combination of rock physics and statis-
tical and probabilistic methods applied to seismic-inversion
results has been successful for dening reservoirs. Even so,
there are some cases in which it is quite complicated to gen-
erate a lithologic discrimination, and predictions cause high
uncertainty levels. This is the case for the Orinoco Oil Belts
reservoirs in eastern Venezuela, where lithologic distinction
generally is dicult, even with rock-physics analysis. To ob-
tain better discrimination, alternative solutions are required.
For this reason, the classication algorithm of support vec-
tor machines (SVM) was evaluated. Consequently, the main
objective is to perform a lithologic discrimination, generating
a lithofacies volume through integration of these three main
topics. To reach this goal, a rock-physics analysis was applied
over well logs and lithologic information, allowing one to ob-
tain relations between lithologic facies and elastic properties
in the reservoirs. Subsequently, through simultaneous seismic
inversion, it was possible to generate P- and S-wave imped-
ances and density volumes, using a priori geologic informa-
tion, well logs, and prestack seismic data as input. Finally,
a lithofacies volume was generated using the algorithm of
support vector machines as a classication tool. Results of
this study allowed the identication of reservoir pay zones,
validating the lithofacies volume over blind wells with 70%
correlation. Corroboration of the SVM eectiveness as a lith-
ologic classier showed validations of more than 86% for this
particular research.
volumes which can help in dening reservoir pay zones
(Mukerji et al., 2001).
In most cases, this last workow has been demonstrated
to be eective for lithologic discrimination in clastic and car-
bonate reservoirs. Nevertheless, predictions cause high un-
certainty level when lithologic distinction is dicult, it thus
being required to use alternative solutions.
As an example, the present work is focused on reservoirs in
the Orinoco Oil Belt of Venezuela. These sand reservoirs pre-
sent low impedance contrast with respect to shaley deposits.
This fact is illustrated in Figure 1a, where acoustic-impedance
distribution is almost the same for dierent facies. Therefore,
probability density functions for each facies will have similar
features, decreasing lithofacies predictions. In addition, litho-
logic discrimination using only two elastic attributes is also
quite complicated (Figure 1b).
These circumstances force the use of several elastic attri-
butes besides acoustic impedance which permit a better litho-
logic discrimination (Calderon et al., 2013). In addition, it
is also important to use another classication algorithm, one
that decreases uncertainty and allows us to manage a higher
dimensional space. For this purpose, we propose the use of
a support-vector-machine (SVM) algorithm to obtain litho-
logic classication.
SVM is a statistics method with a huge computational
success in classication problems such as optical character
recognition (OCR), data mining, bioinformatics, and so

Introduction
Reservoir characterization re-
cently has been focused on linking
elastic behavior to lithologic facies
and oil saturation, it being neces-
sary to propagate those relations
in a 3D distribution with the in-
tention of providing better reser-
voir knowledge. In this sense, it is
well known that by using prestack
seismic inversion, it is possible to
obtain several elastic-property vol-
umes (P-wave [AI] and S-wave
[SI] impedances and density). The
combination of these attributes
with rock-physics analysis allows
the linking of lithology and elastic
properties and the use of statisti-
cal (e.g., discriminant analysis) and Figure 1. Orinoco Oil Belt example: (a) acoustic-impedance histogram; (b) AI-RHOB crossplot.

774 The Leading Edge July 2014

 L a t i n A m e r i c a
forth (Cristianini and Hawe-Taylor, 2000). Application
of this algorithm in lithologic discrimination, using elastic
attributes, represents a new approach in comparison with
other investigations. The eectiveness of this method in the
present work will be a relevant factor to point out in future
Downloaded 07/08/14 to 195.53.125.134. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
research.
The methodology applied in this research is aimed to-
ward lithologic discrimination in clastic reservoirs and con-
sists of integrating rock physics, simultaneous seismic inver-
sion, and support vector machines. Rock-physics analysis
allowed us to obtain the relation between lithology (facies)
and elastic properties. Subsequently, through simultaneous
seismic inversion, it was possible to generate P- and S-wave
impedances and density volumes. Finally, combining the
previous results, a lithofacies volume was generated using
the algorithm of support vector machines as a classication
tool.
Results of this study not only allowed identication of
reservoir pay zones, but it also evaluated SVM eectiveness
and predictability as a lithologic-classication algorithm us-
ing elastic attributes.
Reservoir description and available data
The area of study is in the Orinoco Oil Belt, Eastern Ven-
ezuelan Basin. Exploration of the Orinoco Oil Belt revealed
that it contains the biggest oil reserves in the world (296,500
MMbbl), with a 20% recovery factor. Nevertheless, estima-
tion of oil reserves can be improved with new technologies
and better reservoir knowledge, which means that any contri-
bution will help to reach this goal.
Related to reservoir description, the U sands, belong-
ing to the Ocina Formation (lower Miocene), and the
sandstones of the Merecure (Oligocene) Formation rep-
resent the main reservoirs in the eld under study. Both
formations have a uvial-deltaic origin, with more uvial
inuence in the Merecure Formation. Sand reservoirs are
clean and unconsolidated, with relatively shallow depth
(3500 to 4300 ft), porosities of 20% to 38%, and perme-
abilities of 100 to 1800 mD. These reservoirs are saturated
with heavy oil (10.3 API), thus making elastic proper-
ties of the uids (brine and heavy oil) quite similar, which
means rock-physics analysis is focused on lithology and not
on uid distinction.
Available data for this project cover an area of approxi-
mately 297 km2. Elastic logs and petrophysical evaluations
were provided, but lithofacies logs were missing. The latter
were constructed using a method that combines discriminant
analysis and Bayesian classication (Fournier, 1989) and were
validated with core information, resulting in three dierenti-
ated lithologies (sand, shaley sand, and shale). Full seismic
stack and CRP gathers also were provided (both in time), in
combination with interpreted horizons (required to build a
priori models).
Rock-physics analysis
The goal of this section is to nd the elastic attributes
that provide the best lithologic distinction. This is important
Figure 2. Ocina Formation: (a) AI-RHOB crossplot (black polygon
encloses dierentiated sands); (b) RPT (black arrows indicate shale
lamination).
for the SVM algorithm, which requires us to know the attri-
butes and classes (lithofacies) to make a correct classica-
tion. In addition, a rock-physics template (RPT) (Avseth et
al., 2005) permits us to study reservoir properties in detail.
The idea is to study the response of elastic properties as a
function of petrophysical and sedimentologic data and to
use the resulting relationship to predict the latter from the
former.
Based on reservoir conditions, RPT construction con-
siders three eective-medium models for unconsolidated
sands: friable-sand model (FSM), contact-cement model
(CCM) (Dvorkin and Nur, 1996), and constant-cement
model (CoCM) (Avseth et al., 2000). The rst model ex-
plains variations of elastic properties resulting from the
sorting eect, CCM gives details about elastic-property
changes caused by rock cementation (diagenetic process),
and CoCM combines previous models of diagenetic and
sorting eects.
Four wells were used in this study, none of which had
a shear-velocity log, which is important not only for rock-
physics analysis but also for seismic inversion, which requires
a priori models based on shear impedances. To solve this
problem, S-velocity logs were estimated, similarly to the re-
lationships of Castagna et al. (1985), using linear relations
calculated over VP/VS crossplots. However, in this case, the
coecients of the equations were derived from well-log in-
formation from surrounding elds. Furthermore, for a better
shear-velocity estimation, Ocina and Merecure Formations,
as well as the dierent lithologic classes, were separated for
individual rock-physics studies. After estimations, those rela-
tions were propagated in the main eld for each well, using
compressional-velocity logs as the input.
Figures 2 and 3 show the elastic-attributes crossplot and
RPT models deployed in acoustic velocity versus total poros-
ity and considering 100% water saturation for each forma-
tion.
July 2014 The Leading Edge 775
 L a t i n A m e r i c a

A crossplot for the Ocina For-

mation (Figure 2a) shows an over-
lap in acoustic-impedance values of
sand and shaley facies, with density
being a better lithologic discrimi-
nator. Meanwhile, the RPT for this
Downloaded 07/08/14 to 195.53.125.134. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

case (Figure 2b) points out prefer-

ential directions in sands (black ar-
rows). Those directions were dened
by Dvorkin and Gutierrezs (2002)
model as a shale-lamination direc-
tion. This information is validated
by core information, which indicates
that sands usually have alternating
Figure 3. Merecure Formation: (a) AI-RHOB crossplot; (b) AI-RHOB crossplot (sands only); (c) shale lamination and dispersed shale.
RPT; (d) RPT (sands only). Black polygons enclose clean dierentiated sands and are adjusted to Elastic behavior in the Merecure
the friable-sand model. Formation is completely dierent
than in the previous reservoir level.
In Figure 3, we observe dierentiated
sands (black polygon) with low im-
pedance and density values (Figures
3a and 3c), this last attribute being
a better discriminant between sands
and shales. Figures 3b and 3d show
separation between brine sands and
oil sands. To explain this behavior,
in RPT (Figure 3d), oil sands match
the respective FSM with high poros-
ity, whereas brine sands are tted at
CoCM with 1% or 2% of cement
and lower porosity. This dierence
is caused by sorting; oil sands are
cleaner and have higher porosity and
permeability than shaley brine sands.

Seismic inversion
Figure 4. Inversion workow. Green arrows indicate processes and subprocesses, orange arrows
indicate inversion input, and red arrows indicate results. To create a lithofacies volume, it
is essential to generate elastic-attri-
bute volumes (AI, SI, RHOB), from
which the solution of SVM clas-
sication will be propagated. These
volumes are generated by prestack
simultaneous seismic inversion. The
inversion algorithm used was formu-
lated by Tonellot et al. (2001), based
on a Bayesian model which incorpo-
rates a priori geologic information,
well logs, and prestack seismic data
(Figure 4), with the aim of generat-
ing elastic models consistent with
these input parameters.
In this work, we used CRP gath-
ers with incident angles as large as
40 at the target level, which permits
us to obtain a more condent den-
sity volume. In this sense, based on
Figure 5. Inversion results: (a) elastic sections; (b) well correlation. S/N, gather fold, and AVA analysis,

776 The Leading Edge July 2014

 L a t i n A m e r i c a
we constructed three angle stacks (0 to 14, 12 to 26, and
24 to 38). A well-seismic tie generated an average wavelet
for each angle stack.
On the other hand, a priori models used six interpreted
horizons and three wells to provide the low-frequency model
Downloaded 07/08/14 to 195.53.125.134. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
(LFM). Other inputs to the inversion algorithm were cor-
relation length, S/N, and uncertainty factors (variances and
correlations). These parameters included the LFM and gave
shape to the elastic model.
Figures 5a and 5b illustrate the inversion results. Despite
wide-angle data, density volume was the noisiest property
(Figure 5a). This is a common eect considering all the dif-
culties of inverting for this attribute (inversion algorithm,
far-oset stretching and attenuation, and AVA response) and
taking into consideration not having PS seismic data avail-
able, which improves density inversion (Khare and Rape,
2007). In Figure 5b, inversion logs closely match initial well
logs, of course, with lower frequencies conditioned to seismic
resolution. However, the correlation between inversion and
well was more than 80%, ensuring good quality control of
the project.
SVM theory
This section provides a short description related to the
use of support vector machines, a method that is not com-
mon in this kind of research. The idea of SVM is to generate
a surface, named hyperplane, which can separate two or more
previously categorized populations. The hyperplane provides
a mathematical equation (decision function) capable of clas-
sifying a new vector, after input data training and its crossvali-
dation, to verify SVM predictability.
The eectiveness of SVM resides in the fact that it sup-
ports multidimensional input data (huge numbers of at-
tributes). On the other hand, SVM decreases computation
time in comparison with other classication methods. The
mathematical formulation of SVM has been studied quite ex-
tensively (Cristianini and Hawe-Taylor, 2000; Schlkopf and
Smola, 2002). It requires optimization and regularization of
Figure 6. SVM diagram. Red points represent class with label equal to
+1; green points indicate class with label equal to 1.
778 The Leading Edge July 2014
an objective function and development of a complex vector
and matrix.
In addition, SVM is divided into two main branches, lin-
ear and nonlinear. In the linear approach, the classication is
solved in the same input space, for example, working with R3
data, the hyperplane classier is a plane; in the case of R2 data,
a line represents the separation between two populations.
The main idea of linear SVM is to create a plane (equa-
tion 1), which is dened by a normal vector w and a relative
distance to origin b. This Cartesian equation will dene the
plane and can separate two populations (Figure 6):
: w.x + b = 0 (1)
The most common way to nd is to resolve an objective
function using Lagrange multipliers, minimizing w, b, and _i
in equation 2:
, (2)
where _i are Lagrange multipliers; <w, w> means inner prod-
uct of w vector; xi is a vector sample of data training; and yi
represents the class labeled with +1 or 1 of the vector data
training xi.
Equation 2 is proposed assuming two hyperplanes paral-
lel to the main hyperplane separated by an optimum clas-
sication margin (Figure 6), which contain support vectors
provided by the input data training and that will impact the
solution. There are dierent formulations to equation 2; one
of them is the algorithm of proximal support vector machines
(PSVM) (Fung and Mangasarian, 2001). This algorithm as-
sumes a larger distance of parallel hyperplanes with respect to
the main one; nevertheless, the mathematical structure in this
case is quite similar to that in equation 2.
To determine equation 2, optimization and regularization
methods are required. Most of them use linear equation sys-
tems, but so as not to extend the formulation in this work,
the nal process, after dening w and b, is to classify a new
vector x through a decision function (equation 3):
f(x) = sign(w.x + b). (3)
Related to the decision function (equation 3), when f(x)
= +1 corresponds to a class previously categorized with the
label +1, f (x) = 1 represents the opposite class with label
1, and when f(x) = 0, it means that new vector is located
over the main hyperplane, and its classication is ambiguous.
As we can appreciate from equation 3, the SVM algorithm
represents a binary classication. Even so, there are numerous
techniques that work with multiclass classication.
Regarding the nonlinear approach, this is a more complex
case; here, the classication solution is done in a higher-di-
mension space than the input one. In this spatial translation,
it is required to introduce a kernel function, which linear-
izes the input data in a new higher-dimension space. For its
mathematical simplicity, the most used kernel function is the
Gaussian (equation 4). However, there are dierent types of
 L a t i n A m e r i c a

kernel functions, adapted to the problem and data manage-
ment.
. (4)
Downloaded 07/08/14 to 195.53.125.134. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
In this experiment, the input data for training (elastic at-
tributes and lithology logs) were divided into dierent data
sets according to the number of attributes to test what com-
binations of elastic attributes provide a better classication
solution. In addition, classication solutions were estimated

A Gaussian kernel represents a symmetrical matrix, with for each formation.

a Gaussian function that calculates the square norm of the
dierence between sample combinations (Ai, Ai) of the input
data training; is a parameter that depends on the shape that
takes the Gaussian function over the data-training samples.
Without a priori information available, the best way of esti-
mate it is through a tuning (validation) set.
As with the linear method, Lagrange multipliers are in-
volved in resolving for an objective function, and the decision
function in this case is dened by equation 5:
f (x) = sign(k(x, A)u + b).
The u vector is constructed through data training; k(x, A)
will translate an input vector x on kernel space dened by
data training A. This means classication is solved in kernel
space (higher dimension) and not in the same space of data
training. To add, vectors k(x, A) and u will have equal space
to the number of samples on data training. Those conditions
mean that nonlinear classication takes higher computation
time than the linear method, not only to classify new vectors
but also to perform data training.
For understanding the linear SVM approach graphi-
cally, Figure 7 illustrates in R3 the hyperplane classier in
combination with the populations categorized in the Ocina
Formation. It is evident that the central hyperplane separates
clean sands from shaley facies, with density being the attri-
bute with more inuence on dierentiation. The two planes,
parallel to the central one, are built by the closest vector (sam-
ples) of each class. These vectors are called support vectors,
and as we mentioned previously, they are essential for SVM
mathematical formulation.
(5) Table 1 shows the results of SVM training. The linear
method applied to seven attributes in the Ocina Forma-
tion validates a greater population percentage. Increasing the
number of attributes validates more elements, which does not
occur in the Merecure Formation.
For the nonlinear approach, we get a totally dierent
case. The solution with three attributes is more ecient in

SVM application
In this article, we use well-log information and rock-
physics analysis as SVM data training to generate classica-
tion solutions and then propagate these using P- and S-wave
impedance and density from prestack-inversion volumes. For
this purpose, we used the algorithm of proximal support vec-
tor machines, which resolves the classication problem in a
linear equation system that has been demonstrated to work Figure 7. 3D visualization of elastic attributes and linear-classication
quickly and eectively. SVM (example for the Ocina Formation).

Linear
Number of
Formation Validations 3 properties 4 properties (AI, SI, 7 properties (AI, SI, RHOB, VP /
samples
(AI, SI, RHOB) RHOB, VP /VS ) VS , Poisson, lambda-rho, mu-rho)
Training (%) 75.11 75.11 88.67
Ocina 1459
Test (%) 79.05 79.05 86.30
Training (%) 92.71 92.69 92.41
Merecure 731
Test (%) 91.16 91.27 89.86
Nonlinear (Gaussian kernel)
Number of
Formation Validations 3 properties 4 properties (AI, SI, 7 properties (AI, SI, RHOB,
samples
(AI, SI, VP /VS ) RHOB, VP /VS ) Poisson, lambda-rho, mu-rho)
Training (%) 87.44 80.74 Unstable
Ocina 1459
Test (%) 88.14 80.67 Unstable
Training (%) 94.63 94.43 77.38
Merecure 731
Test (%) 94.48 92.72 76.81
Table 1. SVM linear and nonlinear results. Red boxes highlight the optimum classication for each formation.

780 The Leading Edge July 2014

 L a t i n A m e r i c a

the Merecure Formation, but in-

creasing the number of attributes
in the PSVM nonlinear algorithm
does not increase the validation. In
fact, with that approach, the Oci-
Downloaded 07/08/14 to 195.53.125.134. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

na Formation solution becomes un-

stable. At this time, we do not have
a solid argument to explain the in-
stability of the SVM algorithm for
this case.
Despite all these problems, vali-
Figure 8. 3D visualization of sand distribution: (a) Ocina Formation; (b) Merecure Formation.
dations in both formations are quite
favorable, with training and test validations of more than
86% (Table 1). These results provide a high level of con-
dence and credibility in the SVM method as a lithofacies clas-
sier using elastic attributes.

Lithofacies volumes
After obtaining the SVM classication solutions, deci-
sion functions are propagated in the elastic-property volumes
generated through simultaneous seismic inversion. Figure 8a
illustrates sand spatial distributions in a horizon slice (upper
right in Figure 8a) corresponding to the Ocina Formation
and the corresponding sand relative volume (upper right in
Figure 8b). This formation consists of small sand packages
interbedded with shaley facies. This fact is evident given the
low sand percentages in the lithologic volume, with the great-
est sand accumulation to the west of the eld.
For the Merecure Formation case (Figure 8b), which has
more uvial characteristics, sands are distributed throughout
almost the entire eld. However, the sand relative-volume
map identies the northwestern area (around Wells A and D)
as having the biggest sand accumulation. In addition, there is
a preferred north-south orientation that crosses Wells F and
D, which coincides with the known direction of sedimen-
tation. This is an important result because the rock-physics
study showed that these sands have a high possibility of oil
accumulation.
Finally, Figure 9 shows, for a blind well to the south of
the study area, the comparison between the initial log fa-
cies and the facies obtained from the SVM classication, to
verify lithofacies volume predictability. Despite seismic reso- Figure 9. Lithofacies correlation in a blind well; left: well facies; right:
lution (70 ft), it is possible to identify some thin sand inter- SVM facies classication.
vals in the Ocina Formation. For the Merecure Formation,
it is possible to correlate a big sand package at about 3800 to obtain favorable results for reservoir characterization, pro-
ft. The two sands above are not identied by SVM, possibly viding better reservoir knowledge and decreasing uncertainty
because of the loss of predictability toward the south of the levels.
eld, where the blind well is located. In addition, there is The SVM algorithm classied lithofacies eectively by
the possibility that those sands are not totally clean, and they using elastic-property information. For this purpose, vali-
are not saturated with oil (discrimination conditions for the dations were more than 86%. These results proved that this
Merecure Formation). Nevertheless, correlations of lithofa- method could be an alternative solution to Bayesian classi-
cies were acceptable, obtaining values on the order of 70% cation, which is generally used in such studies.
for two blind wells. By using lithofacies volumes and sand relative-volume
maps, it was possible to identify reservoir pay zones. The
Conclusions Ocina Formation presents higher sand content in the
This research demonstrated that by linking rock physics, west part of the eld, whereas in the Merecure Formation,
seismic inversion, and support vector machines, it is possible pay zones are toward the northwest. This last formation

July 2014 The Leading Edge 781

 L a t i n A m e r i c a

is of signicant interest because rock-physics analysis

showed that sands are clean and have high oil satura-
tion.

References
Avseth, P., J. Dvorkin, G. Mavko, and J. Rykkje, 2000,
Downloaded 07/08/14 to 195.53.125.134. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Rocks physics diagnostic of North Sea sands: Link be-

tween microstructure and seismic properties: Geophysi-
cal Research Letters, 27, no. 17, 27612764, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1029/1999GL008468.
Avseth, P., T. Mukerji, and G. Mavko, 2005, Quantitative seismic
interpretation: Applying rock physics to reduce interpretation
risk: Cambridge University Press.
Calderon, J., A. Ovalles, and J. Revern, 2013, Lithology discrimina-
tion using 3D3C seismic data in the Faja Petrolfera del Orino-
co, Venezuela: 75th Conference and Exhibition incorporating
SPE EUROPEC 2013, EAGE, http://dx.doi.org/10.3997/2214-
4609.20130246.
Castagna, J., M. Batzle, and R. Eastwood, 1985, Relationships be-
tween compressional-wave and shear-wave velocities in clastic
silicate rocks: Geophysics, 50, no. 4, 571581, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1190/1.1441933.
Cristianini, N., and J. Hawe-Taylor, 2000, An introduction to sup-
port vector machines and other kernel-based learning methods:
Cambridge University Press.
Dvorkin, J., and M. Gutierrez, 2002, Grain sorting, porosity, and
elasticity: Petrophysics, 43, no. 3, 185196.
Dvorkin, J., and A. Nur, 1996, Elasticity of high-porosity sand-
stones: Theory for two North Sea data sets: Geophysics, 61, no.
5, 13631370, http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1444059.
Fournier, F., 1989, Extraction of quantitative geologic infor-
mation from seismic data with multidimensional statistical
analyses: Part I: Methodology: 59th Annual International
Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 726729, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1190/1.1889752.
Fung, G., and O. Mangasarian, 2001, Proximal support vector
machine classiers: Computer Sciences Department, Data
Mining Institute Technical Report 01-11, University of Wis-
consin.
Khare, V., and T. Rape, 2007, Density inversion using joint PP/PS
data: Sensitivity to the angle range: 77th Annual International
Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 965969, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1190/1.2792566.
Mukerji, T., A. Jrstad, P. Avseth, G. Mavko, and J. R. Granli,
2001, Mapping lithofacies and pore-uid probabilities in a
North Sea reservoir: Seismic inversions and statistical rock
physics: Geophysics, 66, no. 4, 9881001, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1190/1.1487078.
Schlkopf, B., and A. J. Smola, 2002, Learning with kernels: Sup-
port vector machines, regularization, optimization, and beyond:
MIT Press, Adaptive Computation and Machine Learning Se-
ries.
Tonellot, T., D. Mac, and V. Richard, 2001, Joint stratigraphic
inversion of angle-limited stacks: 71st Annual International
Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 227230, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1190/1.1816577.

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank PDVSA for

cooperation in providing the data, support, and permission to
publish this work.
Corresponding author: atiliotorres@yahoo.com

782 The Leading Edge July 2014