WO2010000967A2 - Method for the probabilistic processing of geophysical data - Google Patents

Method for the probabilistic processing of geophysical data Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2010000967A2
WO2010000967A2 PCT/FR2009/000676 FR2009000676W WO2010000967A2 WO 2010000967 A2 WO2010000967 A2 WO 2010000967A2 FR 2009000676 W FR2009000676 W FR 2009000676W WO 2010000967 A2 WO2010000967 A2 WO 2010000967A2
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
probabilistic
phase
zas
aforesaid
geophysical data
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/FR2009/000676
Other languages
French (fr)
Other versions
WO2010000967A3 (en
Inventor
Luc Sandjivy
Original Assignee
Earth Resource Management Services Erm.S
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Priority to FR0803224A priority Critical patent/FR2932291A1/en
Priority to FR08/03224 priority
Application filed by Earth Resource Management Services Erm.S filed Critical Earth Resource Management Services Erm.S
Publication of WO2010000967A2 publication Critical patent/WO2010000967A2/en
Publication of WO2010000967A3 publication Critical patent/WO2010000967A3/en

Links

Classifications

    • GPHYSICS
    • G01MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01VGEOPHYSICS; GRAVITATIONAL MEASUREMENTS; DETECTING MASSES OR OBJECTS
    • G01V1/00Seismology; Seismic or acoustic prospecting or detecting
    • G01V1/28Processing seismic data, e.g. analysis, for interpretation, for correction
    • G01V1/36Effecting static or dynamic corrections on records, e.g. correcting spread; Correlating seismic signals; Eliminating effects of unwanted energy
    • G01V1/364Seismic filtering

Abstract

The invention relates to a method for the probabilistic processing of geophysical data that comprises the following operational steps: a first step of probabilistic transcription of the deterministic filtration of the above geophysical data; a second step of developing a probabilistic model; and a third step of carrying out the above probabilistic processing of the geophysical data.

Description

 METHOD FOR THE PROBABILISTIC TREATMENT OF GEOPHYSICAL DATA

The present invention relates to a method for the probabilistic processing of geophysical data.

It applies more particularly, but not exclusively, to geophysical data, imaging data obtained by physical methods such as medical imaging, sonar, non-destructive testing of materials or any type of sampling of natural phenomena such as mining reconnaissance campaigns, geochemical inventories, pollution sensors, satellite data, oceanographic data, water analysis ...

Indeed, during reconnaissance campaigns of a natural resource (seismic geophysical campaigns for the recognition of oil deposits), the data are obtained by any acquisition system proceeding by a signal emission from sources (vibration or explosion in seismic acquisition), propagated in the environment to be explored and collected by recording receivers (geophones or hydrophones in seismic acquisition).

The receiver records the temporal variations of the signal emitted by the source after its journey in the spatial medium traversed.

The object of any geophysical treatment is the extraction and positioning in the physical space where the analyzed medium is deployed, variations of amplitude of the component of the recording related to the physical characteristics (speed, density, impedance, saturation in fluids) localized from this medium. The result of this treatment is a geophysical image of the medium recognized by the acquisition device (profile, section and cube of seismic amplitudes for example).

The usual geophysical treatments are based on deterministic (causal) theories of wave propagation linking the sensor recordings to the properties of the medium by a set of physical laws. The application of these physical laws to the recorded data is supposed to lead to a measurement of the properties of the medium, notably its impedance in the case of seismic acquisitions. These treatments give first-order satisfactory results, that is to say to detect and locate the main changes in the physical composition of the medium studied.

Whatever the quality of the acquisition and geophysical treatment (coverage rate and oil seismic resolution), the question always arises of the fine match between the geophysical variations observed and those of the composition of the environment. At this second order of fine observation, the geophysicists agree to recognize the presence of a radical residual indetermination on the geophysical characterization of the medium, linked at the same time to the characteristics of the geophysical measurement (frequency band, presence a noisy component in particular) and the limits of application of the deterministic processing models used.

By its very nature, this radical residual indeterminacy is not quantifiable by the usual processes and results in a certain lack of coherence between the direct observations of the medium (data of drilling or oil production) and their geophysical image. This lack of coherence on a small scale makes the geophysical image unclear or uncertain when it comes to using it to make environmental management decisions. This geophysical uncertainty is spreading to all the modeling of the environment using geophysical data (structural geo-model, reservoir modeling in exploration and oil production).

One of the visible and major consequences of this indeterminacy of the geophysical treatment is therefore the difference between the expected character of the medium recognized by the geophysical device (the impedance, the thickness or the porosity of a reservoir) and the actual character revealed by the direct measurement (well drilling).

In oil exploration, this type of difference can mean the gain or loss of sizeable sums of money in millions of dollars (unproductive drilling or low hydrocarbon recovery rate, for example).

The geophysical treatments implemented are above all deterministic models supported by underlying models of wave propagation in heterogeneous media. To judge their reliability and thus the contribution to operational decision-making (drilling, exploitation strategy), it is necessary to have a quantification of the uncertainties associated with these modelizations in the generic form of "confidence intervals" . Deterministic modelizations do not allow the calculation of confidence intervals sensu stricto except by the realization of several alternative scenarios, which is more and more expensive in engineer time and in computing time as the development of modelizations "heavy Like the pre-stack inversion for example.

The only realistic alternative to this deterministic "trial and error" method is the use of probabilistic models.

The probabilistic approach abandons considering sensor data as indirect measures of the physical properties of the environment. It consists of seeking the best possible estimate of the physical property of the environment from the indirect and fragmentary information constituted by the sensor records. The best possible estimate is defined from the concept of estimation error, specific to the so-called "geostatistical" models, which introduces the notion of the inevitable error committed by replacing the true but unknown value of the unknown property of the medium in one given location, by an estimator calculated from the values measured by the sensors.

This error is of course itself unknown, but it is possible to identify the probabilistic model that minimizes its mean (which must be nil to ensure the unbiasedness of the estimate) and its variance called estimation variance (variance of the unknown error committed by replacing an unknown true value by a modeled value).

The problem lies then in the choice and the specification of the probabilistic model to use. It is certain that in the geophysical field, these models must conform to the physical laws underlying the deterministic models. _ _

There are two types of probabilistic approaches used in petroleum engineering, the "Bayesian" type (a priori known probability) and the "Matheronian" type (probability derived from a correctly chosen and specified probabilistic model), referring respectively to T. BAYES and G. MATHERON.

Geostatistics is the application of probabilities to natural phenomena that develop in space and time, hence the prefix "geo". This theory is particularly exposed in the book "The theory of regional variables" by G. MATHERON (MASSON Publisher).

Regionalised data is data referenced by coordinates in an N-dimensional space, most commonly in a one, two, or three-dimensional geographic space. These data can be single or multivariable, that is, one or more variables are measured or calculated at the data points.

Thus this theory of regionalized variables provides the appropriate language and tools for the estimation of any quantity, unknown a priori, locatable in a given space, from necessarily fragmentary sampling of this same quantity.

To estimate this unknown quantity, geostatistics proposes to elaborate the probabilistic model or models appropriate to the situation, then to choose judiciously among the existing models, according to the available data and the quantity to be estimated, the relevant probabilistic model and the parameters. from its specification to the case treated. The geostatistical reference estimator is known as kriging, a term referring to the work of D. G. KRIGE.

More than the estimate, the probabilistic model also gives an indicator of the accuracy of the estimate. This indicator, called the estimation variance, is a valuable tool because it opens the way to a possible management of uncertainties (translated in terms of variance).

In the context of stationary probabilistic models of order 1 or 2, which assume the translation invariance in space of the mean (order 1) and the variance (order 2) of the modeled variable, the covariance tool or variogram is used to quantify the spatial variability of the data. For a non-stationary model, it is the generalized covariance that is used. Geostatistical models also make it possible to anticipate validly on a future state, for example of the exploitation of the natural resource, when the available data will be more numerous and the problems of estimation will arise differently to the operator.

Whatever the business context of the exploitation of the natural resource, the question always arises of the adequacy of the available data to the resolution of the operational problem.

To the intrinsic quality of each data is added the quality of the spatial integration of this data within the entire game. This is why it is interesting to complete the experimental survey by a geostatistical control associated with geographical coordinates, temporal or other.

The usual methods of quality control or coherence of regionalized data sets are either visual, morphological (shape studies) or statistical (without taking into account spatial coordinates). When used, the filtering processes (frequency or spatial) generally work on monovariable data and on regular grids. Consequently, they are poorly suited to the decomposition of multivariate data irregularly located in the anomalous and coherent component space. _ _

Similarly, the definition of the criteria used to define anomalies is often arbitrary and does not lend itself to experimental verification.

As such, the Applicant has proposed a method for quantifying the spatial quality of a regionalised data set through the determination of a geostatistical index called SQI for "

Spatial Quality Index ", this index being used to locate anomalous prior data and thus to judge the quality of the measurements or digital processing that generated the dataset (patent no. 02 02578 issued to EARTH

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES Limited Liability Company FR).

Nevertheless, kriging estimation techniques, which means "best linear estimator verifying this or that unbiased condition," do not respond in a completely satisfactory way to the quantification of uncertainties and therefore to the optimization of the treatments. geophysical oriented tank.

In order to eliminate these drawbacks, the invention proposes to reconsider the usual deterministic treatments of the geophysical data in terms of estimating the physical properties of the reservoirs from the records of the sensors, according to the following operating phases:

a first phase of probabilistic transcription of the deterministic filtering of the aforesaid geophysical data, for example of the "Wiener in the time domain" type, comprising a factorial kriging estimation of the signal component, this first phase comprising: _ _

• the taking into account of all the traces to be filtered by the realization of a stationary random function Zam of order 2 (am being the amplitudes of the measured traces),

• the determination of the factorial kriging consisting in estimating the Zas component (as: amplitude signal) by minimizing its estimation variance from experimental values Zam,

a second phase of development of a probabilistic model comprising: the decomposition of said random function Zam into the sum of two random functions Zas (as: amplitude signal) and Zab (ab: amplitude noise), Zas and Zab being two independent random functions (uncorrelated),

The verification by a set of statistical tests of the validity of the non-correlation of said random functions Zas and Zab,

The modeling of the experimental spatial covariance (autocorrelation function) of the data of said random function Zam, measured using a sum of two authorized covariance models representing one the spatial covariance of Zas and the other the covariance of Zab, and

a third phase of realization of the aforesaid probabilistic treatment of the geophysical data comprising: the choice of a neighborhood of the trace to be filtered (set of neighboring experimental data participating in the filtering of a given measurement point) guided by the study of the associated estimation variance with a stabilization around its minimum value,

The calculation of the weightings to be applied to each of the points of the neighborhood by the resolution of the linear equation system of said factorial kriging of the component Zas, or at the choice of the component Zab, in the vicinity of the trace to be filtered,

The application of all said weighting units by linear combination of the points with said neighborhood considered, and successively with all the measurement points to be filtered by sliding of the neighborhood retained around each of these points, and

The application of all said weightings by linear combination of the points in said neighborhood considered by making an estimation of the component to be filtered (Zab) or retaining the component (Zas) according to the choice of the operator, at each point of measured seismic amplitude.

Of course, the aforesaid first phase of probabilistic transcription of the deterministic filtering of the aforesaid geophysical data, the aforementioned second phase of the development of a probabilistic model, and the aforementioned third phase of realization of the aforesaid probabilistic treatment of the geophysical data, will be carried out by an automaton. computer science.

Thus the process for the probabilistic processing of geophysical data consists in:

- transcribe in a probabilistic framework each of the usual deterministic treatments of geophysical data,

develop the corresponding probabilistic mathematical models according to the criteria of objectivity exposed by G. MATHERON in the book "Estimate and Choose",

- specify the operating mode and the implementation of these probabilistic models in order to proceed: • the optimal estimation of the geophysical signal or any other geophysical feature that is the subject of the treatment, and

Calculating, from the estimation variance associated in the model to the estimator, confidence indices or other type of confidence interval that can be used to quantify the accuracy of the optimal estimate of the geophysical signal or any other other geophysical character object of the treatment.

More precisely, conventional treatments of seismic data for the purpose of characterization of petroleum reservoirs consist of a series of successive elementary treatments mainly comprising several steps:

filtering and deconvoluting the acquisition data to separate the different types of seismic waves,

optimization of the signal-to-noise ratio along the seismic traces recorded by the receivers,

- in-depth localization of the seismic wave path as a function of the respective positions of the sources and receivers and interference with the geophysical conditions of the medium traversed,

- inversion of the geophysical signal in petrophysical characters of the environments crossed.

Each of these deterministic processing steps can be transcribed in a probabilistic framework. Operational experience has already been gained with probabilistic models of depth conversion (vertical conversion by kriging with external drift or co-kriging with or without the use of seismic velocities), an experience that demonstrates the need for compatibility between deterministic and probabilistic approaches.

Expanding the development of "Matheronian" models adapted to more and more varied geophysical treatments (wave separation, inversion, tomography) is a clear and low-risk technological differentiation pathway.

The description, the hierarchy, the criteria of choice of these global and local probabilistic models are exposed in the book "Estimate and Choose" by G. MATHERON (Edition Ecole des Mines de Paris).

One embodiment of the invention, more specifically concerning the deterministic method of "Wiener filtering in the time domain", used in geophysical signal processing, will be described below, by way of non-limiting example, with reference in the accompanying drawings in which:

Figure 1 is a schematic representation illustrating the main phases of transcription in a probabilistic framework of a usual deterministic treatment (Wiener filtering) of geophysical data;

FIG. 2 a representation of a set of seismic traces to be filtered by the Wiener method;

Figure 3 is a representation of the modeling of the experimental covariance of the measured amplitudes as the sum of two covariance models associated with the signal and noise components of the measured amplitudes;

FIG. 4a is a representation of the result of the filtering in terms of estimation of the "signal" component, and

FIG. 4b is a representation of the result of the filtering in terms of estimation of the "noise" component.

Given a collection of seismic traces in the time domain, the Wiener geophysical filters are used to filter coherent noises along the traces but not correlated from one trace to another and also not correlated to the signal contained in the trace. .

The geophysical filter of a seismic trace consists in elaborating a linear filter (linear combination of the data of the trace) whose pulse response minimizes in the least squares sense the error made by replacing the "desired" signal contained in the trace by the filter result.

This minimization involves the experimental functions of autocorrelation of the trace and its intercorrelation with a reference trace.

Translated into probabilistic terms, this probabilistic transcription amounts to considering the set of traces to be filtered as the realization of a random function Zam (am: measured amplitudes) and the filter as a factorial kriging of the signal component Zas (as: amplitude signal) contained in Zam. Factorial kriging is a classical geostatic estimator consisting of, knowing the experimental values Zam, best estimating the Zas component of the model in minimizing its estimation variance.

The development of the probabilistic model amounts to decomposing the random function Zam into the sum of two random functions Zas (as: amplitude signal) and Zab (ab: amplitude noise), Zas and Zab being two functions independent (uncorrelated). The classical formalism of factorial kriging is applicable to best estimate Zas as a linear combination of the Zam information present in the vicinity of the trace to be filtered. The result of the factorial kriging is the calculation of the weighters to be applied to the surrounding Zam data (impulse response of the filter) and the calculation of the estimation variance of Zas, minimized by kriging.

The practicalization of the probabilistic model of factorial kriging consists in firstly checking by a set of statistical tests the validity of the hypothesis of non-correlation of a "signal" component and a "noise" component within experimental data measured.

It is then necessary to model the experimental spatial covariance (autocorrelation function) of the Zam data measured using a sum of two authorized covariance models representing one the spatial covariance of Zas and the other the one from Zab. Once the covariance model has been established, a neighborhood of the trace to be filtered (a set of neighboring experimental data participating in the filtering of a given measurement point) will be chosen in which the weights to be applied to each of the points of the neighborhood will be calculated by resolution. of the linear equation system of the factorial kriging of the Zas component, or at the choice of the Zab component. This choice of neighborhood will be guided by the study of the associated estimation variance that will be sought to stabilize around its minimum value.

This set of weights will be applied by linear combination of the points of the neighborhood considered, and successively to all the measuring points to be filtered by sliding of the neighborhood retained around each of these points.

The application of the set of weightings by linear combination of the points in the neighborhood considered results in an estimate of the component to filter (Zab) or hold (Zas) according to the choice of the operator, at each point of measured seismic amplitude.

In accordance with the methodology illustrated in FIG. 1, the probabilistic transcription of a Wiener filter applied to seismic traces in the time domain is represented in the form of two mapped procedures; the approach described in the left frame concerns the deterministic filter of Wiener; the approach described in the right frame concerns the probabilistic filter, the underlying hypothesis being that the trace of measured amplitudes Am (t) is the sum of a "signal" trace As (t) and a trace " brait »An (t) not correlated with each other.

In the example shown in Figure 2a, the amplitude traces are measured by different sensors positioned along a well, the source being located vertically of the device. Thus the set of seismic traces to be filtered are indicated as a function of time along the ordinate axis and the depth along the abscissa axis.

Figure 2b shows the experimental variogram (equivalent of the autocorrelation function in the context of second-order stationary probabilistic models used to describe the seismic amplitudes along the tracks) of the seismic section, i.e. evolution of the experimental variance (figured on the time axis in ordinate), according to the distance between the measurements (distance axis in abscissa).

This set of measured amplitudes is horizontalized according to the first arrival of each trace and normalized in terms of energy so as to satisfy the second-order stationary hypothesis.

It is a question of separating in this set of measured amplitudes located in a space (offset, time), the train of so-called descending waves that is to say in line direct source sensor of the rising wave train (after reflection on the geological interfaces) and residual noise.

It is thus a question of interpreting the amplitudes measured in probabilistic terms, namely: the measured amplitudes are considered as the realization of a stationary random function of order 2, itself sum of two orthogonal random functions representing the components " signal "or" down-waves "and" noise "or" rising waves "plus" residual noise ". Figure 3 shows the modeling of the experimental variogram of the amplitudes measured in the vertical (time) and horizontal (offset) directions. The horizontal direction represents the direction of "descending waves". In the vertical direction, the vertical variogram is the strict equivalent of the autocorrelation function used in Wiener filtering.

Thus, the variogram model of the measured amplitudes is decomposed as a sum of two variogram models of signal (down-wave) and noise (rising-wave and residual noise) variograms.

Figure 4 represents the result of the factorial kriging (estimation) of the "signal" (down-wave) and "noise" components (rising waves and residual noise) of the measured amplitudes.

We can note the good reproduction of the horizontal character of the descending waves and the non-correlation with the estimate of the rising waves and the residual noise.

Claims

[Lambda],
claims
A method for the probabilistic processing of geophysical data, comprising a signal component comprising traces to be filtered, in particular for characterization of petroleum reservoirs,
characterized in that it comprises the following operating phases:
a first phase of probabilistic transcription of the deterministic filtering of the aforesaid geophysical data, for example of the "Wiener in the time domain" type, comprising a factorial kriging estimation of the signal component, this first phase comprising:
the taking into account of all the traces to be filtered by the realization of a stationary random function Zam of order 2 (am being the amplitudes of the measured traces),
the determination of factorial kriging consisting of estimating the Zas component (as: amplitude signal) by minimizing its estimation variance from experimental values Zam,
a second phase of developing a probabilistic model comprising: decomposing said random function Zam into the sum of two random functions Zas (as: signal amplitude) and Zab (ab: noise amplitude), Zas and Zab being two independent random functions (uncorrelated),
the verification by a set of statistical tests of the validity of the non-correlation of said random functions Zas and Zab,
the modeling of the experimental spatial covariance (autocorrelation function) of the data of said random function Zam, measured using a sum of two authorized covariance models representing one the spatial covariance of Zas and the other the covariance of Zab, and
a third phase of realization of the aforesaid probabilistic treatment of the geophysical data comprising:
the choice of a neighborhood of the trace to be filtered (set of neighboring experimental data participating in the filtering of a given measurement point) guided by the study of the associated estimation variance comprising a stabilization around its minimum value, "calculating the weighting to be applied to each of the points of the neighborhood by the resolution of the linear equation system of said factorial kriging of the Zas component, or at the choice of the Zab component, to said neighborhood of the trace to be filtered,
the application of all said weighting units by linear combination of the points with said neighborhood considered, and successively with all the measurement points to be filtered by sliding of the neighborhood retained around each of these points, and
the application of all said weightings by linear combination of the points in said neighborhood considered by making an estimation of the component to be filtered (Zab) or retaining the component (Zas) according to the choice of the operator, at each point of measured seismic amplitude.
2. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that the above-mentioned first phase of probabilistic transcription of the deterministic filtering of said geophysical data is carried out in probabilistic terms using a vocabulary and a syntax appropriate to said terms. - Io -
3. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that the aforesaid second stage of development of the probabilistic model is performed respecting the constraints of objectivity associated with said syntax.
4. Method according to claim 2, characterized in that the aforesaid first phase of probabilistic transcription deterministic filtering of said geophysical data is carried out using the vocabulary of G. MATHERON.
5. Method according to claim 3, characterized in that the aforesaid second phase of development of the probabilistic model is performed respecting the constraints of objectivity associated with said syntax of G. MATHERON.
6. Method according to the preceding claims, characterized in that:
the aforesaid first phase of probabilistic transcription of the deterministic filtering of the aforesaid geophysical data, the aforementioned second phase of elaboration of a probabilistic model, and
the aforementioned third phase of realization of the aforesaid probabilistic treatment of the geophysical data, are carried out by a computer automaton.
PCT/FR2009/000676 2008-06-10 2009-06-09 Method for the probabilistic processing of geophysical data WO2010000967A2 (en)

Priority Applications (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
FR0803224A FR2932291A1 (en) 2008-06-10 2008-06-10 Method for the probabilistic treatment of geophysical data
FR08/03224 2008-06-10

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2010000967A2 true WO2010000967A2 (en) 2010-01-07
WO2010000967A3 WO2010000967A3 (en) 2010-12-29

Family

ID=40122465

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/FR2009/000676 WO2010000967A2 (en) 2008-06-10 2009-06-09 Method for the probabilistic processing of geophysical data

Country Status (2)

Country Link
FR (1) FR2932291A1 (en)
WO (1) WO2010000967A2 (en)

Citations (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5051963A (en) * 1990-07-09 1991-09-24 Mobil Oil Corporation Process for cancelling stationary sinusoidal noise in seismic data
WO2003058279A1 (en) * 2002-01-14 2003-07-17 Compagnie Generale De Geophysique Method for filtering seismic data, particularly by kriging

Patent Citations (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5051963A (en) * 1990-07-09 1991-09-24 Mobil Oil Corporation Process for cancelling stationary sinusoidal noise in seismic data
WO2003058279A1 (en) * 2002-01-14 2003-07-17 Compagnie Generale De Geophysique Method for filtering seismic data, particularly by kriging

Non-Patent Citations (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
COLÉOU T ET AL: "Multivariate geostatistical filtering of time-lapse seismic data for an improved 4-D signature" SEG EXPANDED ABSTRACTS, vol. 21, no. 1662, 2002, XP002508822 *
EAGE: "Final Announcement - 66th EAGE Conference & Exhibition"[Online] 2004, XP002603584 66th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Paris Extrait de l'Internet: URL:http://www.eage.org/files/Paris_final_final.pdf> [extrait le 2010-10-05] *
GRONNWALD T ET AL: "Sigma processing of VSP Data" EXTENDED ABSTRACT, 71ST EAGE CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION, 8-11 JUNE 2009, AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS, 8 juin 2009 (2009-06-08), pages 1089-1093, XP008123963 -& EARTHDOC: "Publication details: Sigma processing of VSP Data"[Online] 2009, XP002603582 71ST EAGE CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION, Amsterdam Extrait de l'Internet: URL:http://www.earthdoc.org/detail.php?pubid=23848> [extrait le 2010-10-05] -& EOST: "Participation of EOST staff and alumni at EAGE Amsterdam 2009"[Online] 2009, page 4 PP, XP002603583 71ST EAGE CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION Extrait de l'Internet: URL:http://eost.u-strasbg.fr/geophyse/Actualites/EAGE2009_anciens.pdf> [extrait le 2010-10-05] *
HOEBER H ET AL: "On the use of geostatistical filtering techniques in seismic processing" SEG EXPANDED ABSTRACTS, vol. 22, no. 2024, 2003, XP002508823 *
RUIZ-ALZOLA J ET AL: "Kriging filters for multidimensional signal processing" SIGNAL PROCESSING, vol. 85, no. 2, février 2005 (2005-02), pages 413-439, XP002508824 *
SANDJIVY L ET AL: "Why should we use probability models for seismic data processing? A case study comparing Wiener and Kriging filters" EXTENDED ABSTRACT, 70TH EAGE CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION, 9-12 JUNE 2008, ROME, ITALY, 9 juin 2008 (2008-06-09), pages 3197-3201, XP008123957 -& EARTHDOC: "Publication details: Why should we use probability models for seismic data processing? A case study comparing Wiener and Kriging filters"[Online] 2008, XP002603580 70th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Rome Extrait de l'Internet: URL:http://www.earthdoc.org/detail.php?pubid=10104> [extrait le 2010-10-05] -& EAGE: "Technical Program of the 70th EAGE Conference & Exhibition"[Online] 2008, XP002603581 70th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Rome Extrait de l'Internet: URL:http://www.eage.org/files/rome2008tp.pdf> [extrait le 2010-10-05] *

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
FR2932291A1 (en) 2009-12-11
WO2010000967A3 (en) 2010-12-29

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
Foti et al. Surface wave methods for near-surface site characterization
Pyrcz et al. Geostatistical reservoir modeling
US8843353B2 (en) Hybrid deterministic-geostatistical earth model
Bosch et al. Seismic inversion for reservoir properties combining statistical rock physics and geostatistics: A review
Grana et al. Stochastic inversion of facies from seismic data based on sequential simulations and probability perturbation method
US8861308B2 (en) Simultaneous joint inversion of surface wave and refraction data
US8612194B2 (en) Updating a subterranean model using at least electromagnetic data
US7577061B2 (en) Process and program for characterising evolution of an oil reservoir over time
US7492664B2 (en) Method for processing acoustic reflections in array data to image near-borehole geological structure
EP0896677B1 (en) Method for inverting reflection trace data from 3-d and 4-d seismic surveys
US7706981B2 (en) Method for generating reservoir models utilizing synthetic stratigraphic columns
EP0889331B1 (en) Method for 3D modelling of the impedance of a heterogeneous volume of the subsurface
US6246963B1 (en) Method for predicting stratigraphy
Bosch et al. Petrophysical seismic inversion conditioned to well-log data: Methods and application to a gas reservoir
Calder et al. Automatic processing of high‐rate, high‐density multibeam echosounder data
US6832161B1 (en) Method for attenuating water layer multiples
CN102124374B (en) Method for separating independent simultaneous sources
AU2009333603B2 (en) System and method for reconstruction of time-lapse data
Puryear et al. Layer-thickness determination and stratigraphic interpretation using spectral inversion: Theory and application
US7266041B1 (en) Multi-attribute background relative scanning of 3D geophysical datasets for locally anomaluous data points
Connolly et al. Stochastic inversion by matching to large numbers of pseudo-wells
EP1637904B1 (en) Method for generating a reservoir model with flexible mesh
US7363163B2 (en) Method for updating a geological reservoir model by means of dynamic data
US20120191353A1 (en) Model based workflow for interpreting deep-reading electromagnetic data
US7206782B1 (en) Method for deriving a GrAZ seismic attribute file

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 09772650

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A2

NENP Non-entry into the national phase in:

Ref country code: DE

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase

Ref document number: 09772650

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A2