Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

ProfessorMikeWarner

Faculty of Engineering, Department of Earth Science & Engineering

Professor
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 6535m.warner

 
 
//

Assistant

 

Ms Daphne Salazar +44 (0)20 7594 7401

 
//

Location

 

RSM 1.46CRoyal School of MinesSouth Kensington Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Guasch:2019:10.1190/geo2018-0377.1,
author = {Guasch, L and Warner, M and Ravaut, C},
doi = {10.1190/geo2018-0377.1},
journal = {Geophysics},
pages = {R447--R461},
title = {Adaptive waveform inversion: practice},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0377.1},
volume = {84},
year = {2019}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - Adaptive waveform inversion (AWI) reformulates the misfit function used to perform full-waveform inversion (FWI), so that it no longer contains local minima related to cycle skipping. It does this by finding a model that drives the ratio of the predicted and observed data sets to unity rather than driving the difference between these two data sets to zero as is the case for conventional FWI. We apply AWI to a 3D field data set acquired over a pervasive gas cloud in the North Sea, comparing its performance with that of conventional FWI in a variety of circumstances. When starting inversion from 3 Hz, and using a good starting model obtained from reflection tomography, FWI and AWI generate similar models although the FWI result contains edge artifacts that are not produced by AWI. However, when the starting frequency is increased to approximately 6 Hz, or when the starting model is less accurate, FWI fails to recover a good model whereas AWI continues to converge. When both of these conditions apply, FWI fails comprehensively, leading to a model that is significantly worse than the starting model, whereas the AWI result remains largely unaffected. We applied Kirchhoff depth migration to the fully-processed data using the FWI result obtained following reflection tomography, and using the AWI result obtained from a simple one-dimensional starting model. We use the resulting migrated volumes, together with measures of residual moveout throughout the volume, to show that the AWI result from a simple starting model is at least as good as the FWI result obtained following tomography. We conclude that AWI is robust in the presence of cycle skipping on this 3D field data set, and can proceed successfully from a less-accurate starting model, and from a higher starting frequency, in circumstances in which FWI fails completely.
AU  - Guasch,L
AU  - Warner,M
AU  - Ravaut,C
DO  - 10.1190/geo2018-0377.1
EP  - 461
PY  - 2019///
SN  - 0016-8033
SP  - 447
TI  - Adaptive waveform inversion: practice
T2  - Geophysics
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0377.1
UR  - https://library.seg.org/doi/10.1190/geo2018-0377.1
VL  - 84
ER  -
Download