2018
DOI: 10.3390/geosciences8110388
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of Different Statistical Models in Probabilistic Joint Estimation of Porosity and Litho-Fluid Facies from Acoustic Impedance Values

Abstract: We discuss the influence of different statistical models in the prediction of porosity and litho-fluid facies from logged and inverted acoustic impedance (Ip) values. We compare the inversion and classification results that were obtained under three different statistical a-priori assumptions: an analytical Gaussian distribution, an analytical Gaussian-mixture model, and a non-parametric mixtu re distribution. The first model assumes Gaussian distributed porosity and Ip values, thus neglecting their facies-depe… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2
1
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 32 publications
(41 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At the same time, the linear forward model might not be sufficiently accurate to describe the relation between seismic data and elastic parameters in cases of strong elastic contrasts at the reflecting interface and far source–receiver offsets. In these cases, oversimplified prior models and/or forward modelling operators could provide unreliable or even biased model parameter estimations (Aleardi ; Madsen and Hansen ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At the same time, the linear forward model might not be sufficiently accurate to describe the relation between seismic data and elastic parameters in cases of strong elastic contrasts at the reflecting interface and far source–receiver offsets. In these cases, oversimplified prior models and/or forward modelling operators could provide unreliable or even biased model parameter estimations (Aleardi ; Madsen and Hansen ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%