next up previous [pdf]

Next: Determination of edge diffraction Up: Method Previous: Method

Objective function

To solve for a seismic diffraction image $ \mathbf {m}_d$ , we extend the approach developed by Merzlikin and Fomel (2016) to three dimensions:

$\displaystyle J(\mathbf{m}_d) = \Vert\mathbf{d}_{PI} - \mathbf{PDL}\mathbf{m}_d\Vert _{2}^{2},$ (1)

where $ J(\mathbf{m}_d)$ is the objective function, $ \mathbf {d}_{PI} = \mathbf {PDd}$ and $ \mathbf {d}$ is ``observed'' data. Here, forward modeling corresponds to the chain of operators: three-dimensional path-summation integral filter $ \mathbf{P}$ (Merzlikin and Fomel, 2015,2017), azimuthal plane wave destruction (AzPWD) filter $ \mathbf {D}$ (Merzlikin et al., 2017b,2016) and three-dimensional Kirchhoff modeling $ \mathbf{L}$ . The path-summation integral filter $ \mathbf{P}$ can be treated as the probability of a diffraction at a certain location. Azimuthal plane wave destruction filter $ \mathbf {D}$ removes reflected energy perpendicular to the edges. Therefore, AzPWD emphasizes edge diffraction signature, which when measured in the direction perpendicular to the edge exhibits a hyperbolic moveout and kinematically behaves as a reflection when observed along the edge. AzPWD application is the key distinction from the 2D version of the workflow (Merzlikin and Fomel, 2016), in which plane-wave destruction filter (PWD) (Fomel, 2002) is applied along the time-distance plane (Fomel et al., 2007; Merzlikin et al., 2018). After weighting the data $ \mathbf {d}_{PI} = \mathbf {PDd}$ by path-summation integral $ \mathbf{P}$ and AzPWD filter $ \mathbf {D}$ , model fitting is constrained to most probable diffraction locations.


next up previous [pdf]

Next: Determination of edge diffraction Up: Method Previous: Method

2021-02-24