From the Hagedoorn imaging technique to Kirchhoff migration and inversion

Bleistein, Norman; Gray, Samuel H.

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2478.2001.00290.x

Cited by 38 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accordingly, each O x t − data point is equally distributed over a semicircle in the image space (Hogendoorn, 1954;Bleinstein & Gray, 2001) so that all the semicircle intersect at sc r . This graphical method is known as Wave Interference Migration (Gazdag & Sguazzero, 1984) sometimes also addressed in the literature as A-scan-driven approach (Marklein et al, 2002).…”

Section: Fig 2 Geometry Of the Subsurface Prospecting Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ground Penetrating Radar Subsurface Imaging of Buried Objects

Soldovieri¹,

Solimene²

2010

Radar Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Fig 2 Geometry Of the Subsurface Prospecting Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ground Penetrating Radar Subsurface Imaging of Buried Objects

Soldovieri¹,

Solimene²

2010

Radar Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the framework of this paper, Kirchhoff imaging and data-mapping techniques Tygel et al, 1996;Bleistein and Gray, 2001͒, conventionally applied to a global model, are considered as composite methods. The basic components are preparation of the model, which means to make it acceptable for ray tracing; a ray-based algorithm to obtain Green's function attributes; and the specific imaging/data-mapping algorithm, e.g., PSDM by diffraction stack ͑Hubral et al, 1996͒.…”

Section: Kirchhoff Imaging In a Local Or Global Volume Elementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improved applicability of ray tracing in seismic acquisition, imaging, and interpretation

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ray-based seismic modeling methods can be applied at various stages of the exploration and production process. The standard ray method has several advantages, e.g., computational efficiency and the possibility of simulating propagation of elementary waves. As a high-frequency approximation, the method also has a number of limitations, particularly with respect to a lack of amplitude reliability in the presence of rapid changes of the model functions representing elastic parameters and interfaces. Given the objective of improving the applicability of the standard ray method, we present a strategy that does not require specific extension to finite frequencies. Instead, we define each ray-based process as an element of a system that, as a composite process, is able to obtain better results than the ray-based process applied alone. Other elements of the composite process can be finitedifference modeling or numerical solutions for surface and volume integrals, which are basic constituents of Kirchhoff modeling and imaging. We also include among the process elements recently developed techniques for simulating the migration amplitude on a target reflector and in a local volume, e.g., a reservoir zone. The model is decomposed according to its complexity into volume elements, surface elements, or a combination. The composite process consists of a specified interaction between process elements and model elements, which fits well with the philosophy of modern software design. Model elements that will be exposed to ray-tracing algorithms may need appropriate preparation, e.g., smoothing and resampling. We demonstrate specifically, in a tutorial example, that simulating the seismic response from a reflector by ray-based composite processes can yield better results than applying standard ray tracing alone.

show abstract

“…Whether true or not, the image of the balls in the water conveys exactly the correct picture of what happens in migration. This principle, as embodied in Hagedoorn's work, was to give birth several years later to the Kirchhoff or "diffraction stack" method (Bleistein, 1999;Bleistein and Gray, 2001). In the modern world, the Kirchhoff method in all its various forms has proved to be one of the most flexible and robust approaches to seismic imaging.…”

Section: -1959: Dips Swings and Special Machinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A brief history of seismic migration

Bednar

2005

GEOPHYSICS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I attempt to focus on the chronology of seismic imaging. I start in the mid-1920s, progress through the human "computer"-based methods of the 1940s and 1950s, discuss the emergence of digital wave-equation technology in the 1960s and early 1970s, and finally end with a review of the present. I include a bit of speculation about the future of seismic imaging, but the meat of the article is on seismic-imaging history. Based on the timing of their publications, I claim there are three key contributors to the theoretical developments of modern seismic imaging: F. Rieber, J. G. Hagedoorn, and J. F. Claerbout. None of these men were the first to consider the seismic-imaging problem, but their papers and algorithms have probably been quoted more often than anyone else's. One certainly must give credit as well to C. H. Dix and M. M. Slotnick for similar contributions. Other names that come to mind include Hans Sattlegger in Germany, A. J. Berkhout in the Netherlands, Bill Schneider at GSI in Dallas, and Robert Stolt at CONOCO in Ponca City, Oklahoma. However, without the independent computational progression predicted by Moore's law (computer speed doubles every 18 months), the spectacular subsurface images produced today would not be possible. I hope to convince the reader that in addition to the development of the vast literature on seismic-imaging theory, another, less-publicized, parallel technological progression has focused on the development of efficient machines to produce, with minimal human intervention, an increasingly more accurate image of the strata below the recording instruments. Unfortunately, with a few key exceptions, the names of many of the contributors to this aspect of seismic imaging have been lost. The digital revolution in the 1960s appears to be the culmination of this attempt at mechanization, but not until the development of truly powerful scientific computers did the more accurate and advanced theoretical developments in seismic-imaging theory become practical to apply and use in the search for diminishing supplies of hydrocarbons. In fact, one can argue that we still don't have sufficient computer power to do everything we need and want to do. But that's another story.

show abstract

From the Hagedoorn imaging technique to Kirchhoff migration and inversion

Cited by 38 publications

References 25 publications

Ground Penetrating Radar Subsurface Imaging of Buried Objects

Ground Penetrating Radar Subsurface Imaging of Buried Objects

Improved applicability of ray tracing in seismic acquisition, imaging, and interpretation

A brief history of seismic migration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About