High-resolution seismic processing by Gabor deconvolution

Abstract

Since viscoelastic attenuation effects are ubiquitous in subsurface media, the seismic source wavelet rapidly evolves as the wave travels through the subsurface. Eliminating the source wavelet and compensating the attenuation effect together may improve seismic resolution. Gabor deconvolution can achieve these two processes simultaneously, by removing the propagating wavelet which is the combination of the source wavelet and the attenuation effect. The Gabor deconvolution operator is determined based on the Gabor spectrum of a nonstationary seismic trace. By assuming white reflectivity, the Gabor amplitude spectrum can be smoothed to produce the required amplitude spectrum of the propagating wavelet. In this paper, smoothing is set as a least-squares inverse problem, and is referred to as regularized smoothing. By assuming that the source wavelet and the attenuation process are both minimum phased, the phase spectrum of the propagating wavelet can be defined by the Hilbert transform of the natural logarithm of the smoothed amplitude spectrum. The inverse of the complex spectrum of the propagating wavelet is the Gabor deconvolution operator. Applying it to the original time-frequency spectrum of the nonstationary trace produces an estimated time-frequency spectrum of reflectivity series. The final time-domain highresolution trace, obtained by an inverse Gabor transform, is close to a band-pass filtered version of the reflectivity series.

Warped mapping–based blind deconvolution for resolution improvement

“…However, the resolution of original field data does not usually meet the above requirement due to the anelasticity of the subsurface medium and the influence of the seismic wavelet. In recent years, to improve the resolution of seismic data, geophysicists have increasingly shown interests in Q‐compensated processing schemes, such as Q‐compensated reverse time migration (QRTM) (Zhu et al ., 2014; Zhu and Harris, 2015; Sun and Zhu, 2015; Sun et al ., 2016), inverse Q filtering (Wang, 2002, 2008; Braga and Moraes, 2013; Xue et al ., 2019) and nonstationary deconvolution (Margrave et al ., 2011; Chen et al ., 2013; Gholami, 2016, 2017; Sui and Ma, 2019). Even though QRTM shows good performance, it can be computationally more expensive than inverse Q filtering and nonstationary deconvolution.…”

Seismic Resolution Enhancement by Frequency-Dependent Wavelet Scaling

“…The editor coordinating the review of this manuscript and approving it for publication was Alejandro Frery. [10], Gabor deconvolution to enhance seismic resolution [11] [12] [13], and multichannel blind deconvolution which exploits the lateral coherence among the seismic traces [14] [15] [16].…”

Seismic resolution enhancement in shale-oil reservoirs

“…Resolution enhancement methods include prediction deconvolution (Robinson, 1967;Robinson and Treitel, 1967;Peacock and Treitel, 1969), Gabor deconvolution (Margrave et al, 2005(Margrave et al, , 2011Chen et al, 2013), and inverse-Q filtering (Wang, 2002;Guo and Wang, 2004;Zhao and Wang, 2004;Wang, 2006Wang, , 2008Gan et al, 2009) and so on. However, we have a fine processed seismic data set with a relative high dominant frequency (41 Hz against 25 Hz).…”