See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/335523902

Spectral Decomposition AVO attributes for identifying potential

hydrocarbon-related frequency anomalies

Article in First Break · May 2019

DOI: 10.3997/1365-2397.n0027

CITATIONS READS

11 3,117

1 author:

Chris Han

13 PUBLICATIONS 19 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Chris Han on 07 September 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Spectral Decomposition AVO attributes for
identifying potential hydrocarbon related
frequency anomalies
Chris Han1* demonstrates a workflow to combine Spectral Decomposition and AVO
techniques to assist in identification of low frequency anomalies, which could act as a direct
hydrocarbon indicator.
Introduction
Low frequency seismic anomalies have long been a subject of
interest to geoscientists involved in hydrocarbon exploration
since such ‘gas-shadows’ can be a direct hydrocarbon indicator
(DHI). Published studies have demonstrated evidence for them
potentially resulting from increased seismic attenuation and
velocity dispersion, as a result of hydrocarbon saturation. The
topic gained wide interest during the 2000s with well-cited
publications by Castagna et al. (2003), Ebrom (2004), Chapman
et al. (2005, 2006) and Odebeatu et al. (2006), to name a few.
The consensus of these studies was that hydrocarbon related fre-
quency effects are predicted to be detectable on stacked seismic
data. Furthermore, it has been suggested that low frequencies
tend to show the highest sensitivity to fluid changes. (e.g.
Korneev et al., 2004). The effect has been shown not only from
seismic data; studies involving laboratory tests and borehole
data provide similar conclusions. Overall there is general agree-
ment that the effect exists. However the physical cause remains
inconclusive. Several studies have also shown evidence that
hydrocarbon reservoirs have an amplitude-versus-offset (AVO)
frequency dependence (e.g. Chapman et al. (2005, 2006), Ode-
beatu et al. (2006), Liu et al. (2006), Ren et al. (2007), Zhang et
al. (2007), Chen et al. (2008), Wu et al. (2014)). In the modelled
case of gas-saturated sands, low frequencies have tended to
show the greatest change in amplitude with offset (Figure 1a).
The idea of using AVO and Spectral Decomposition (SD) to
understand frequency anomalies and potential links to reservoir
Figure 1 a) Modelled AVO curves at various frequencies for a gas saturated case (from Odebeatu et al., 2006). b) Modelled variation between gas vs wet amplitudes at
different offsets for a thin bed (from Ren et al., 2007).
1
GeoTeric
*
Corresponding author, E-mail: Chris.Han@geoteric.com
SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION
fluid content has been approached by several of these authors. The
published work largely used model-based techniques to predict
AVO effects for different frequencies (Figure 1b), and then applied
this information to aid interpretation of anomalies observed on
iso-frequencies sections. The results convincingly suggest that
there are differences in the spectral content of seismic data which
could be exploited for improved hydrocarbon identification. The
results of these pioneering publications is the basis from which the
workflow presented in this paper was conceived. Here these ideas
are approached from an interpretation perspective and applied in a
practical manner using commercial interpretation software.
Background theory
Numerous potential causes of frequency anomalies below reser-
voirs have been previously identified, for example Ebrom (2006)
outlined ten possible mechanisms split between stack-related and
non-stack-related. High levels of attenuation and dispersion in
response to hydrocarbon presence, particularly gas, tend to be
the favoured candidate mechanisms for genuine non-processing
related anomalies, though there are likely multiple linked factors
involved. Dvorkin and Mavko (2006) concluded that there is
enough evidence to agree that attenuation and dispersion in
sedimentary rocks are related to fluids. Elevated attenuation
levels may be associated with strong velocity dispersion which
could potentially explain the observed frequency dependence
of impedance. (Batzle and Wang, 1992; Chapman et al., 2006).
The outcome of a combination of these effects is that anomalies
FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019 1
 SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION
observed at hydrocarbon reservoirs tend to show characteristics
of low-frequency amplification and high-frequency attenuation
(Wang et al., 2014). In this paper the author does not intend
to enter the discussion of the complex mechanics behind the
phenomenon but aims to provide a simple method of recognising
such anomalies more easily and promote the use of frequency
restricted analysis to aid seismic interpretation.
For context, a brief description of the logic and assumptions
made are provided as follows. Working under the assumption that
elevated attenuation does indeed occur for hydrocarbon bearing
zones, the amount of attenuation should be expected to vary with
offset causing AVO effects, as evidenced by several previously
referenced studies. In simplified terms, differences in the ray-path
angles and travel distances with offset should lead to variable
amounts of (a) ‘natural’ (i.e. non-hydrocarbon related) attenuation
during wave propagation to reservoir (e.g. geometrical spreading,
absorption, transmission losses, anisotropy etc.) (b) differences
in energy partitioning at reservoir interface(s), and (c) potential
differences of wave attenuation and dispersion when passing
through the hydrocarbon saturated reservoir. AVO compliant seis-
mic processing attempts to address factor (a) by spectral balancing
based on areas without AVO anomalies, with the aim of leaving
just effects of (b) and (c) in the resulting angle gathers and stacks,
both of which are fluid related, and likely intrinsically linked to
one another. If we assume that the amount of attenuation is fre-
quency-dependent, with low frequencies tending to experience the
most sensitivity to fluids as literature suggests, it seems logical that
combining the sensitivity of angle response to fluids and the sen-
sitivity of low frequencies to fluids should offer the best chance of
fluid discrimination. (With a caveat that the effects of each do not
oppose and cancel one another out). This theory forms the premise
of this study where a combination of SD and AVO techniques are
applied to identify amplitude variations at specific frequencies.
Typically, AVO studies are carried out using full bandwidth data;
perhaps differences in the AVO response at specific frequencies
could provide increased sensitivity to attenuation related effects.
Methodology
Spectral Decomposition and AVO techniques are combined into
a unified workflow to produce reconnaissance attributes aimed at
frequency anomaly detection. The inputs were 3D partial angle-
stack volumes, which were deemed of high enough data quality for
the analysis, including spectral balancing applied by the seismic
contractors. Processing will not be discussed in detail but is always
a concern to the validity of results from any amplitude analysis.
Detailed AVO studies are typically performed by analysing the
CDP gathers in the pre-stack domain. However, it is common for
seismic interpreters to receive partial angle-stacks for interpretation
purposes, and the pre-stack gathers investigated by rock physics
specialists should any targets of interest be identified for a quanti-
tative study. In the arsenal of the seismic interpreter are workflows
to calculate AVO attributes from the partial angle-stacks. Given
the high quality of modern data processing these datasets are
increasingly reliable and can add significant value to interpretation.
Common AVO attributes which can be generated using partial
angle stacks (e.g. Avseth et al., 2005; Simm et al., 2014) include:
i. Far stack minus the near stack (FN)
2 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019
ii. Far minus near times far (FNXF)
iii. Far minus near times near (FNXN)
iv. Gradient (G)
v. Intercept (R(0))
vi. AVO product (PR) = R(0)G
While these attributes are typically computed for the full-band-
width data, a new approach was investigated to create them using
restricted frequencies as input. Spectral Decomposition provides
an ideal tool for isolating specific frequency bands of seismic data
(Partyka et al., 1999). It can be easily tailored to specific objec-
tives in terms of bandwidth, filter length, output types such as
bandpass, magnitude and phase components, and is highly repeat-
able (subject to the algorithm used). Attributes (i-iii) are far-near
combinations which can be calculated using either SD ‘bandpass’
(filtered reflectivity with phase and amplitude retained) or
restricted versions using ‘magnitude’ (instantaneous-amplitude/
envelope with no phase information) (e.g. Barton and Gullette,
1996). Both were investigated as part of the study. Where the
enveloped input has been used the attribute will be referred to as
‘restricted’. The remaining attributes (iv-vi) require the bandpass
equivalent as input since polarity information is an essential part
of their calculations. Calculation of G and R(0) using angle-stack
volumes also requires an assumption that the signal content of the
stack is a fair representation of the mid-angle.
Results and examples
Two example studies are presented using Australian datasets,
courtesy of Geoscience Australia. Seismic data are in time domain
and in the examples shown a hard event is represented by a peak.
Example 1 – Stybarrow Oil Field
The first example is from the well documented Stybarrow oil
field, located in the Exmouth Basin. The reservoir is formed of a
high-quality sandstone of the Late Jurassic/Early Cretaceous
Macedon Member within a tilted fault block trap.
Spectral Decomposition was applied to create a set of
frequency bandpass and magnitude outputs across the spectrum
from the Near (0-15°) and Far (21-31°) angle stacks. Figure 2
shows a comparison of the SD Near versus Far stack responses
between Stybarrow-1, located in the centre of the field, and
Stybarrow-3, located downdip near the OWC. The former
encountered clean, oil-bearing sands with net pay of 19 m. The
latter encountered poorer quality sands with only 2.1 m net pay;
below the seismic resolution.
At Stybarrow-1 the low frequencies show a clear brightening
at far offsets compared to nears at the top reservoir and extending
down beneath. Stybarrow-3, where the sand is very thin and
below seismic resolution, shows no such anomaly with well-bal-
anced amplitudes across the spectrum.
AVO attributes created for isolated frequencies allowed
expansion of the analysis from the well locations. Figure 3 shows
the results of the FN attribute volumes displayed on the base
reservoir horizon, where the impact of attenuation is likely to be
the most significant. For the full spectrum no significant AVO
response is produced. However, in frequency restricted attributes,
the reservoir is clearly delineated at 20Hz and 30Hz as a strong

Figure 2 Comparison of band restricted seismic for Near vs Far Stack traces at Stybarrow-1 and Stybarrow-3 wells. The Far stack shows brightening at and below the reservoir
for low frequencies.
positive anomaly (strong Far Stack amplitude relative to Near).
It is not apparent at higher frequencies. The full bandwidth data
encompasses all the frequencies and as a result tends to take the
characteristic of the dominant frequency of approximately 45 Hz.
Interestingly, significant AVO variation was observed at the base
reservoir but not so apparent at the top.
In previous analyses of Stybarrow published by Emton et al.
(2004), AVO modelling of well data predicted a slight discrimina-
tion between oil bearing and brine sands. An ‘enhanced AVO gra-
dient’ calculated by (F–N)*N had been found to highlight a ‘subtle
but discernable’ anomaly over the Stybarrow structure down to the
OWC. This attribute was generated and showed the same subtle
result reported by Emton for the full spectrum data. The SD low
frequency versions were found to be significantly more successful
at highlighting the reservoir as an anomaly (Figure 4).
To attempt to understand why such results may occur a series
of AVO cross-plots were generated (Figure 5) using the Intercept
and Gradient (Rutherford and Williams, 1989; Castagna et al.,
1998). A series of sample areas on the base-reservoir reflector,
SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION
Figure 3 FN AVO attributes displayed on base
reservoir surface. The response varies for different
frequencies with the low frequencies better
highlighting the reservoir outline restricted to the
tilted fault block. The Full Spectrum result does not
highlight any significant AVO anomaly.
were plotted using the full spectrum and SD attributes. Five
sample areas were selected: Stybarrow-1 and -2 locations; both
oil-bearing sands, Stybarrow-3; a very thin oil sand below
seismic resolution, and two additional areas; a further oil sand
and non-reservoir area below the OWC.
The full-spectrum intercept vs gradient cross-plot shows
a predominant Type-III AVO response with discernible fluid
trend. Non-reservoir samples plot along a distinct background
trend line through the zero-crossing, while a gradual transition
through the oil sands occurs. The frequency-restricted plots tell
different stories. At low frequencies distinct separation of the
non-reservoir zones to the oil-bearing zones occurs, with tight
clusters for each being produced. The non-reservoir samples are
shifted off the theoretical background line into distinctly nega-
tive R(0) zones, i.e. high impedance, decreasing AVO (class-I).
This differentiation is likely to be the key to low-frequency
attributes more successfully highlighting the anomaly from the
background. The ‘true’ non-reservoir sample is also differenti-
ated from the thin sand at Stybarrow-3, which plots as negative
FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019 3
 SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION

Figure 4 Comparison of the ‘Enhanced Gradient Attribute’ generated for Full Spectrum Data, 20 Hz and 30 Hz band restricted components, displayed on base reservoir
horizon. The Full Spectrum result is as described by Emton et al. (2004) a subtle AVO anomaly at the Stybarrow Structure is observed. The 20 Hz and 30 Hz results show a
very obvious anomaly which conforms to the structure. There are also some near field anomalies highlighted.

Figure 5 AVO cross plots of intercept (R0) versus gradient (G) for different frequency bands using different samples of the Base-Reservoir event. The relationship between
intercept and gradient is seen to vary for different frequencies. Lower frequencies show best separation of oil sands whilst the high frequencies do not show an AVO
response. The Full Spectrum data has a dominant frequency of around 45Hz and shows a close match to the cross-plot results at the isolated frequencies.

gradient, while the non-reservoir is positive. At high frequencies
(>50 Hz) no AVO anomaly is observed, only a background trend
line. This indicates there could be low signal-to-noise ratio,
also at high frequencies phase complications become a greater
issue for reliable AVO. Based on these results, it appears that
20-25 Hz are the best bulk discriminator of oil sand versus
wet-sand/shale, while the 30-40 Hz range may better divide the
oil sands among themselves. High frequencies do not appear to
be contributing to the useful AVO response; their inclusion may
potentially be detrimental to the full spectrum result.
Example 2 – Anomalies and migration pathways
(Calliance/Brecknock)
The second example uses the ‘Rosewall and Calliance 3D’
from the Browse Basin to illustrate application of the workflow
for reconnaissance. The same process was applied to create a
restricted 20 Hz FN attribute from partial angle stacks. This
was then co-visualised with an edge attribute using opacity
blending to give structural context to anomalies. A colourmap
was selected to give focus to elevated far stack response (i.e.
strongly positive result) which represent AVO Class-II and III

4 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019


anomalies, typically the classes most likely to be indicative of
hydrocarbon bearing sands. The ‘restricted’ FN attribute was
favoured for reconnaissance, since low-frequency ‘shadows’
are likely not to be restricted to a single seismic event it makes
sense to remove the phase from the equation for simplicity.
This eliminates varying polarity of anomalies so they will be
represented by a single amplitude-change sign. Therefore, larger
more cohesive anomalies will be produced, making them easier
to identify.
The low frequency restricted FN attribute showed a strong
correlation to the results at well locations within, and in
close proximity to the Calliance gas field, with restriction to
depositional features, in agreement with the fluvio-deltaic
environment of the Mid-to-Lower Jurassic, Plover Formation
reservoirs. Figure 6 illustrates how the low frequency result
created large, obvious anomalies, compared to the scattered
and less discriminate response of the full-bandwidth data.
Elsewhere in the survey, large low frequency AVO anomalies
were identified in the Uppermost Jurassic/Early Cretaceous,
within and immediately above the Aptian Upper Echuca
SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION
Shoals formation. This formation is of transgressive marine
origin comprising claystone and interbedded sandstone. It is
regionally extensive and forms a major seal but also potential
source and reservoir rocks, though is not a primary reservoir
target. Though the anomalies are strikingly obvious in the
low frequency restricted FN-attribute, the seismic response is
typically low-mid amplitude and not particularly eye-catching
any of the stacks or in full-bandwidth attributes. The anomaly
top correlates to soft events which are laterally restricted by
stratigraphic terminations (Figure 7). Often the response can be
traced moving upwards into other similar features at locations
which coincide with fault zones, potentially providing evidence
of migration pathways, with faults breaching the seal and
providing conduits (Figure 8).
Across the dataset multiple lines of evidence support that the
attribute is responding to some form of fluid response:
• Limited to specific stratigraphic sequences regionally known
to be hydrocarbon bearing
• Strong conformance to structure. Faults seen to act as baffles
and likely conduits. Anomaly strength changing at faults.
Figure 6 Example low frequency AVO anomalies
observed in the Jurassic Plover Formation and Late
Triassic. The anomalies appear to conform to either
up-dip locations within fault blocks or to stratigraphic
terminations. No obvious corresponding amplitude
anomalies are apparent in the seismic data. Top: Full
Stack seismic data. Middle: Opacity blend results
showing low frequency FN AVO attribute overlaying
seismic data. Bottom: Opacity blend of Full Spectrum
FN AVO created using Envelope results.
FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019 5
 SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION

Figure 7 Above: Large Low Frequency AVO anomaly

near top of Echuca Shoals Fm. Response appears to
move into upper units where faulting occurs. Below:
Example of the feature in Full Stack seismic. The event
in question shows a range of amplitudes generally
mid to low. Overlying events show brightening in
places. Stratigraphic restriction is commonly apparent
(green arrows).

Figure 8 Examples of Potential Migration pathways highlighted by low frequency AVO. Coloured arrows indicate potential pathways which the response appears to follow. A
possible sequence of events is shown. Faulting appears to play a crucial role in the location and strength of anomalies.

Areas of strong response tend to have underlying fault path-
ways to them which could have allowed charge.
• Dispersion and loss of response at heavily faulted zones.
• Correlation of major anomalies with depositional features
• Anomalies are not restricted to single reflector but move
between them in a predictable up-dip manner.
• Not restricted to high amplitude or poor data quality areas.
Cross plotting of samples on the top anomaly pick (Figure 9)
helped to explain why the response is much brighter in the 20 Hz
attribute than the full bandwidth. Anomaly samples are shifted
away from the background trend or Class-III zone for full band-
width, further into the class II/IIp zone at low frequency, which
means a stronger more exaggerated amplitude change with offset
occurring at low frequency. Areas outside the anomaly remain
close to the background trend line.

6 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019


Figure 9 Investigation of large low frequency AVO anomaly. Left: comparison of full spectrum Restricted FN attribute to 20 Hz. Anomaly is not very apparent in full spectrum
data but very striking in the 20 Hz. Middle: AVO cross plots for sample areas on top anomaly reflector event. Right: 20 Hz Restricted FN attribute display on top anomaly
reflector with sample area locations marked.
To confirm the validity of the anomaly, investigation of the
geology at the interval of interest was carried out. Using high
definition frequency decomposition RGB colour blending, it
was possible to image extremely subtle depositional features
at the anomaly event (Figure 10). Submarine channels and
fans are interpreted, suggesting amalgamated sand bodies. The
anomalies are well restricted to these bodies, so look likely
to be responding either to their lithology, fluid content, or a
combination. Interestingly while such significant low frequency
AVO anomalies were produced, the full spectrum result is quite
understated in comparison; one might have expected the higher
frequency content to be more sensitive to tuning of thin events
if it was purely lithology controlling the amplitudes.
Discussion
The study illustrates how amplitude analysis may potentially
be improved by using the most appropriate frequency ranges.
Castagna et al. (2003) made a salient point that conventional
amplitude analysis carried out on the full-spectrum data essen-
tially means the interpretation is based on the ‘accidental’ dom-
inant frequency, rather than frequencies selected purposefully
for the objectives at hand. Since different frequencies show
variable sensitivity to geological parameters useful information
may be neglected by restricting interpretation to the dominant
frequency. Frequency restricted AVO cross-plot classifications
also vary as a function of frequency. Perhaps this could be used
as a tool to determine which frequencies are the best fluid or
lithology discriminators and where there is no useful signal.
Whether it is appropriate to use AVO classification on frequency
SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION
restricted data in this way is another discussion, certainly care
is required.
Directly combining Spectral Decomposition and AVO to
look for frequency anomalies may be advantageous over using
the full-stack data, or iso-frequencies from various stacks in iso-
lation, for several reasons. Previous gas shadow examples tended
to focus on identifying iso-frequency brightening on individual
stacks. Calculating differences between angle stacks allows for
the potential combination of both brightening and dimming
effects to be incorporated. Instead of the ‘base amplitude’ used
to define anomalies being that of surrounding areas, it is now
the amplitude of the other stack at the same location. Therefore,
anomalous differences in low amplitude areas may be revealed
which would not be identified from individual iso-frequency
sections purely due to their low amplitude. Conversely it may
prevent over-interpretation of bright events which could be cre-
ated by other factors such as tuning. The workflow also avoids
the comparison of low to high frequency signals to define what
constitutes an anomaly. Since different frequencies are subject to
different amounts of ‘natural’ (i.e. non-hydrocarbon) attenuation,
dip-dependence, and interference effects due to varying tuning
thicknesses, in addition to a non-white source spectrum, complex
treatment to account for these effects across the frequency
spectrum is required to enable any true hydrocarbon related
anomalies to be revealed this way. Such workflows have been
successfully demonstrated in research papers (e.g. Wang et al.,
2014). However, due to the complexity of calculations required
they are inaccessible to most interpreters. Here, by calculating
the AVO differences of isolated frequencies, the aim is not to
FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019 7
 SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION
achieve a direct measure of attenuation, but potentially a proxy
to it. Or at least to identify the most fluid sensitive components
of the seismic signal for interpretation.
Conclusions
The workflow explored use of frequency restricted attributes
to assist in identifying low frequency AVO anomalies, which
could potentially aid hydrocarbon detection. The observed
results support that AVO is a frequency dependent technique,
and this can potentially be exploited to improve discrimination
of fluid content from seismic data. Results suggest that
inclusion of high frequencies in the full spectrum data may act
to mask fluid-related AVO effects, which appear better distin-
guished at lower frequencies. AVO anomalies that were not
apparent in full spectrum data were revealed or enhanced in the
low frequency attributes. Many were not associated with bright
spots on any of the stacks individually, therefore the workflow
could be useful in areas where there are no obvious amplitude
anomalies observed, (e.g. stratigraphic traps) which might
otherwise be overlooked and lead to missed opportunities.
The anomaly observed at Stybarrow, if not some processing
artefact, suggested that oil as well as gas has enough impact on
the low-frequency AVO to create detectable anomalies, though
further validation is needed.
As with all interpretation, frequency anomalies should be
considered within the broader geological context. Analysis of
structure and stratigraphy was important for instilling confidence
that anomalies were not processing artefacts; co-visualisation
with other volumes was found to be highly effective for this. A 3D
approach also allowed patterns and distributions to be identified
8 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019
Figure 10 Depositional features imaged at the anomaly interval near the Top
Echuca Shoals Formation. a) High Definition Frequency Decomposition Colour
Blend result revealing extremely subtle depositional features at the location of
large low frequency AVO anomaly. Small channels and submarine fan lobes are
interpreted. b) 20 Hz Restricted FN AVO attribute clearly defines several of the
interpreted lobes as an anomaly. c) Full Spectrum Restricted FN AVO attribute
does a poorer job of delineating the fans and would not have highlighted this
feature as a convincing anomaly.
which would not be possible based on a purely 2D approach.
Numerous lines of evidence suggest that the results are genuine,
though it is unclear how the anomalies relate to hydrocarbons in
place vs residual hydrocarbon and lithology. While the results
are compelling, further research is required to better explain the
findings.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Geoscience Australia for making
the data publicly available, Dr Peter Szafian for proof reading and
invaluable feedback, and to the referenced authors whose shared
findings led to this study being carried out.
References
Avseth, P., Mukerji, T. and Mavko, G. [2005]. Quantitative Seismic
Interpretation: Applying Rock Physics Tools to Reduce Interpretation
Risk. Cambridge University Press.
Barton, J. and Gullette, K. [1996]. Reconnaissance amplitude versus
offset techniques in the Niger Delta. AAPG Bulletin. 80.
Batzle, M. and Wang, Z. [1992]. Seismic properties of pore fluids.
Geophysics 57, 1369–1408.
Castagna, J.P. Sun, S. and Siegfried, R.W. [2003]. Instantaneous spectral
analysis: Detection of low-frequency shadows associated with
hydrocarbons. The Leading Edge 22, 122-127.
Chapman, M., Liu, E. and Li, X-Y. [2005]. The influence of abnormally
high reservoir attenuation on the AVO signature. The Leading Edge,
24 (11), 1120-1125.
Chapman, M., Liu. E. and Li, X.Y. [2006]. The influence of fluid-sen-
sitive dispersion and attenuation on AVO analysis. Geophysical
Journal International 167, 89–105.

Chen, G., Matteucci, G., Fahmy, B. and Finn, C. [2008]. Spectral-decom-
position response to reservoir fluids from a deepwater West Africa
reservoir. Geophysics, 73 (6), 23–30.
Dvorkin, J., Mavko, G. and Nur, A. [1995]. Squirt flow in fully saturated
rocks. Geophysics 62, 106–117.
Ebrom, D. [2004]. The low-frequency gas shadow on seismic sections.
The Leading Edge 23 (8), 713–816.
Ementon, N., Hill, R., Flynn, M., Motta, B. and Sinclair, S. [2004]. Sty-
barrow Oil Field - From Seismic to Production, The Integrated Story
So Far. SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition,
Abstracts.
Odebeatu, E., Zhang, J., Chapman, M., Liu, E. and Li, X. [2006]. Appli-
cation of spectral decomposition to detection of dispersion anomalies
associated with gas saturation. The Leading Edge, 25 (2), 206-210.
Korneev, V.A., Goloshubin, G.M., Daley, T.M. and Silin, D.B. [2004].
Seismic low-frequency effects in monitoring fluid-saturated reser-
voirs. Geophysics 69, 522–532.
Liu, E. and Chapman, M., Loizou, N. and Li, X. [2006]. Applications of
spectral decomposition for AVO analyses in the west of Shetland.
SEG Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, Doi:10.1190/1.2370106.
View publication stats
SPECIAL TOPIC: MODELLING/INTERPRETATION
Partyka, G., Gridley, J. and Lopez, J. [1999]. Interpretational applications
of spectral decomposition in reservoir characterization. The Leading
Edge, 18 (3), 353-360.
Ren, H., Goloshubin, G. and Hilterman, F. [2007]. Spectra crossplot. SEG
Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts.
Rutherford, S.R. and Williams, R.H. [1989]. Amplitude-versus-offset
variations in gas sands. Geophysics, 54, 10.1190
Simm, R. and Bacon, M. [2014]. Seismic Amplitude. Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Wang, L., Gao, J., Xu, Z., Weng, B. and Jiang, X. [2014]. Hydrocarbon
detection using adaptive selected spectrum attenuation. Journal of
Applied Geophysics. 105 (1).
Wu, X., Chapman, M., Li, X.Y. and Boston, B. [2014]. Quanti-
tative gas saturation estimation by frequency-dependent ampli-
tude-versus-offset analysis. Geophysical Prospecting. 62 (6), 1224-
1237.
Zhang, J., Chapman, M., Liu, E., Li, X.Y., Wang, S. and Liu, Z. [2007].
Fluid detection by spectral decomposition: lessons from numerical,
physical modelling and field studies. 69th EAGE Annual Meeting,
Expanded Abstracts.
FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 37 I MAY 2019 9