2018
DOI: 10.1109/tgrs.2017.2778196
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multidimensional Seismic Data Reconstruction Using Frequency-Domain Adaptive Prediction-Error Filter

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This strategy includes methods based on the Fourier transform (Mousavi and Langston, 2016a), wavelet transform (Mousavi and Langston, 2016b; Mousavi et al ., 2016), seislet transform (Fomel and Liu, 2010; Chen et al ., 2014), curvelet transform (Naghizadeh and Sacchi, 2010), shearlet transform (Liu et al ., 2016), Radon transform (Beylkin, 1987), wavelet transform (Sweldens, 1995), dictionary learning (Siahsar et al ., 2017a, 2017b; Chen, 2020) and deep‐learning techniques (Li et al ., 2018b; Zhu et al ., 2019). Another type of approach for random‐noise attenuation focuses on enhancing useful signals and suppressing random noise by utilizing a predictable property, such as tx predictive filtering (Abma and Claerbout, 1995), fx predictive filtering (Canales, 1984; Gulunay, 1986), the complex‐trace analysis method (Karsli et al ., 2006), non‐stationary predictive filtering (Liu et al ., 2012; Liu and Chen, 2013; Liu et al ., 2018; Li et al ., 2018a) and the polynomial fitting–based approach (Lu and Lu, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This strategy includes methods based on the Fourier transform (Mousavi and Langston, 2016a), wavelet transform (Mousavi and Langston, 2016b; Mousavi et al ., 2016), seislet transform (Fomel and Liu, 2010; Chen et al ., 2014), curvelet transform (Naghizadeh and Sacchi, 2010), shearlet transform (Liu et al ., 2016), Radon transform (Beylkin, 1987), wavelet transform (Sweldens, 1995), dictionary learning (Siahsar et al ., 2017a, 2017b; Chen, 2020) and deep‐learning techniques (Li et al ., 2018b; Zhu et al ., 2019). Another type of approach for random‐noise attenuation focuses on enhancing useful signals and suppressing random noise by utilizing a predictable property, such as tx predictive filtering (Abma and Claerbout, 1995), fx predictive filtering (Canales, 1984; Gulunay, 1986), the complex‐trace analysis method (Karsli et al ., 2006), non‐stationary predictive filtering (Liu et al ., 2012; Liu and Chen, 2013; Liu et al ., 2018; Li et al ., 2018a) and the polynomial fitting–based approach (Lu and Lu, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seismic data denoising and interpolation play a vital role in seismic processing and have an influence on seismic interpretation particularly. Because of the presence of the complex surface geologic conditions and the irregular acquisition field area [1,2], random noise and missing data are common cases in seismic exploration. In general, acquired data from field should be preprocessed before data processing [3,4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The decomposition‐based denoising methods consider the separability of seismic signal and random noise and attempt to extract useful information from the principal components of the noisy data. Typical methods include the empirical‐mode decomposition (EMD) related methods (Huang et al ., 1998), for example, the ensemble EMD (Wu and Huang, 2009), complete ensemble EMD (Colominas et al ., 2012), improved complete ensemble EMD (Colominas et al ., 2012), singular value decomposition‐related methods (Bekara and van der Baan, 2007) and non‐stationary decomposition with regularization (Li et al ., 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%