Machine learning for seismic exploration: Where are we and how far are we from the holy grail?

Author:

Khosro Anjom Farbod1ORCID,Vaccarino Francesco2ORCID,Socco Laura Valentina3

Affiliation:

1. DIATI, Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy.

2. DISMA, Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy.

3. DIATI, Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy. (corresponding author)

Abstract

Machine-learning (ML) applications in seismic exploration are growing faster than applications in other industry fields, mainly due to the large amount of acquired data for the exploration industry. The ML algorithms are constantly being implemented for almost all the steps involved in seismic processing and interpretation workflow, mainly for automation, processing time reduction, efficiency, and in some cases for improving the results. We carry out a literature-based analysis of existing ML-based seismic processing and interpretation published in SEG and EAGE literature repositories and derive a detailed overview of the main ML thrusts in different seismic applications. For each publication, we extract various metadata about ML implementations and performances. The data indicate that current ML implementations in seismic exploration are focused on individual tasks rather than a disruptive change in processing and interpretation workflows. The metadata indicate that the main targets of ML applications for seismic processing are denoising, velocity model building, and first-break picking, whereas, for seismic interpretation, they are fault detection, lithofacies classification, and geobody identification. Through the metadata available in publications, we obtain indices related to computational power efficiency, data preparation simplicity, real data test rate of the ML model, diversity of ML methods, etc., and we use them to approximate the level of efficiency, effectivity, and applicability of the current ML-based seismic processing and interpretation tasks. The indices of ML-based processing tasks indicate that current ML-based denoising and frequency extrapolation have higher efficiency, whereas ML-based quality control is more effective and applicable compared with other processing tasks. Among the interpretation tasks, ML-based impedance inversion indicates high efficiency, whereas high effectivity is depicted for fault detection. ML-based lithofacies classification, stratigraphic sequence identification, and petro/rock properties inversion exhibit high applicability among other interpretation tasks.

Publisher

Society of Exploration Geophysicists

Subject

Geochemistry and Petrology,Geophysics

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Machine learning for subsurface geological feature identification from seismic data: Methods, datasets, challenges, and opportunities;Earth-Science Reviews;2024-10

2. Adaptive dual-domain filtering for random seismic noise removal;GEOPHYSICS;2024-07-25

3. Deep Learning in Geophysics: Current Status, Challenges, and Future Directions;Journal of the Korean Society of Mineral and Energy Resources Engineers;2024-02-28

4. Future trends;Artificial Intelligence for a More Sustainable Oil and Gas Industry and the Energy Transition;2024

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3