Seismic velocity estimation: A deep recurrent neural-network approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Applying deep learning to 3D velocity model building remains a challenge due to the sheer volume of data required to train large-scale artificial neural networks. Moreover, little is known about what types of network architectures are appropriate for such a complex task. To ease the development of a deep-learning approach for seismic velocity estimation, we have evaluated a simplified surrogate problem — the estimation of the root-mean-square (rms) and interval velocity in time from common-midpoint gathers — for 1D layered velocity models. We have developed a deep neural network, whose design was inspired by the information flow found in semblance analysis. The network replaces semblance estimation by a representation built with a deep convolutional neural network, and then it performs velocity estimation automatically with recurrent neural networks. The network is trained with synthetic data to identify primary reflection events, rms velocity, and interval velocity. For a synthetic test set containing 1D layered models, we find that rms and interval velocity are accurately estimated, with an error of less than 44 m/s for the rms velocity. We apply the neural network to a real 2D marine survey and obtain accurate rms velocity predictions leading to a coherent stacked section, in addition to an estimation of the interval velocity that reproduces the main structures in the stacked section. Our results provide strong evidence that neural networks can estimate velocity from seismic data and that good performance can be achieved on real data even if the training is based on synthetics. The findings for the 1D problem suggest that deep convolutional encoders and recurrent neural networks are promising components of more complex networks that can perform 2D and 3D velocity model building.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".