Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
120 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

OpenFWI: Large-Scale Multi-Structural Benchmark Datasets for Seismic Full Waveform Inversion (2111.02926v6)

Published 4 Nov 2021 in cs.LG and eess.SP

Abstract: Full waveform inversion (FWI) is widely used in geophysics to reconstruct high-resolution velocity maps from seismic data. The recent success of data-driven FWI methods results in a rapidly increasing demand for open datasets to serve the geophysics community. We present OpenFWI, a collection of large-scale multi-structural benchmark datasets, to facilitate diversified, rigorous, and reproducible research on FWI. In particular, OpenFWI consists of 12 datasets (2.1TB in total) synthesized from multiple sources. It encompasses diverse domains in geophysics (interface, fault, CO2 reservoir, etc.), covers different geological subsurface structures (flat, curve, etc.), and contains various amounts of data samples (2K - 67K). It also includes a dataset for 3D FWI. Moreover, we use OpenFWI to perform benchmarking over four deep learning methods, covering both supervised and unsupervised learning regimes. Along with the benchmarks, we implement additional experiments, including physics-driven methods, complexity analysis, generalization study, uncertainty quantification, and so on, to sharpen our understanding of datasets and methods. The studies either provide valuable insights into the datasets and the performance, or uncover their current limitations. We hope OpenFWI supports prospective research on FWI and inspires future open-source efforts on AI for science. All datasets and related information can be accessed through our website at https://openfwi-lanl.github.io/

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (71)
  1. J. Virieux and S. Operto. An overview of full-waveform inversion in exploration geophysics. Geophysics, 74(6):WCC1–WCC26, 2009.
  2. Andreas Fichtner. Full seismic waveform modelling and inversion. Springer Science & Business Media, 2010.
  3. A wave-energy-based precondition approach to full-waveform inversion in the time domain. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2012, pages 1–5. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 2012.
  4. Image-guided sparse-model full waveform inversion. Geophysics, 77(4):R189–R198, 2012.
  5. Double-difference elastic-waveform inversion with prior information for time-lapse monitoring. Geophysics, 78(6):R259–R273, 2013.
  6. Transmission+ reflection anisotropic wave-equation traveltime and waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 67(2):423–442, 2019.
  7. Multiscale phase inversion for vertical transverse isotropic media. Geophysical Prospecting, 69(8-9):1634–1649, 2021.
  8. Acoustic-and elastic-waveform inversion using a modified Total-Variation regularization scheme. Geophysical Journal International, 200(1):489–502, 2014.
  9. Quantifying subsurface geophysical properties changes using double-difference seismic-waveform inversion with a modified Total-Variation regularization scheme. Geophysical Journal International, 203(3):2125–2149, 2015.
  10. Simultaneous multifrequency inversion of full-waveform seismic data. Geophysics, 74(2):R1–R14, 2009.
  11. Antoine Guitton. Blocky regularization schemes for full-waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 60(5):870–884, 2012.
  12. Multiscale reflection phase inversion with migration deconvolution. Geophysics, 85(1):R55–R73, 2020.
  13. Deep learning for seismic inverse problems: Toward the acceleration of geophysical analysis workflows. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 38:89–119, 2021.
  14. Integrating physics-based modeling with machine learning: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.04919, 1(1):1–34, 2020.
  15. Applications of deep learning to neuro-imaging techniques. Frontiers in neurology, 10:869, 2019.
  16. A high-bias, low-variance introduction to machine learning for physicists. Physics reports, 810:1–124, 2019.
  17. Deep-learning inversion: A next-generation seismic velocity model building method. Geophysics, 84(4):R583–R599, 2019.
  18. Deep-learning tomography. The Leading Edge, 37(1):58–66, 2018.
  19. Geophysical inversion versus machine learning in inverse problems. The Leading Edge, 37(12):894–901, 2018.
  20. InversionNet: An efficient and accurate data-driven full waveform inversion. IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging, 6:419–433, 2019.
  21. Multiscale data-driven seismic full-waveform inversion with field data study. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, pages 1–14, 2021.
  22. Velocity model building with a modified fully convolutional network. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018, pages 2086–2090. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 2018.
  23. An intriguing property of geophysics inversion. In Proc. Thirty-ninth International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2022.
  24. Alan Richardson. Seismic full-waveform inversion using deep learning tools and techniques. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.07232, 2018.
  25. Seismic velocity estimation: A deep recurrent neural-network approach. Geophysics, 85(1):U21–U29, 2020.
  26. Deep recurrent architectures for seismic tomography. In 81st EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2019, volume 2019(1), pages 1–5. European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, 2019.
  27. Data-driven seismic waveform inversion: A study on the robustness and generalization. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote sensing, 58(10):6900–6913, 2020.
  28. Seismic impedance inversion based on cycle-consistent generative adversarial network. Petroleum Science, 19(1):147–161, 2022.
  29. Stochastic seismic waveform inversion using generative adversarial networks as a geological prior. Mathematical Geosciences, 52(1):53–79, 2020.
  30. InversionNet3D: Efficient and scalable learning for 3-D full-waveform inversion. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 60:1–16, 2022.
  31. Unsupervised learning of full-waveform inversion: Connecting CNN and partial differential equation in a loop. In Proc. Tenth International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2022.
  32. Deep learning for seismic inverse problems: Toward the acceleration of geophysical analysis workflows. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 38(2):89–119, 2021.
  33. Physics-guided data-driven seismic inversion: Recent progress and future opportunities in full waveform inversion. Earth and Space Science Open Archive, page 31, 2022.
  34. Velocity model building in a crosswell acquisition geometry with image-trained artificial neural networks. Geophysics, 85(2):U31–U46, 2020.
  35. Deep-learning seismic full-waveform inversion for realistic structural modelsdl seismic fwi. Geophysics, 86(1):R31–R44, 2021.
  36. Building complex seismic velocity models for deep learning inversion. IEEE Access, 9:63767–63778, 2021.
  37. Deep learning for velocity model building with common-image gather volumes. Geophysical Journal International, 228(2):1054–1070, 2022.
  38. Mrinal K Sen. Seismic inversion. Society of Petroleum Engineers Richardson, TX, 2006.
  39. Automated fault detection without seismic processing. The Leading Edge, 36(3):208–214, 2017.
  40. Elastic properties estimation from prestack seismic data using ggcnns and application on tight sandstone reservoir characterization. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 60:1–21, 2021.
  41. David Lumley. 4D seismic monitoring of CO22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT sequestration. The Leading Edge, 29(2):150–155, 2010.
  42. Jeffrey Wagoner. 3D geologic modeling of the southern San Joaquin basin for the westcarb Kimberlina demonstration project-a status report. Technical report, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States), 2009.
  43. 3D variable-grid full-waveform inversion on GPU. Petroleum Science, 16(5):1001–1014, 2019.
  44. Development of a multi-scale synthetic data set for the testing of subsurface CO22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT storage monitoring strategies. In American Geophysical Union (AGU), 2021.
  45. U.S. Department of Energy. Science-informed machine learning for accelerating real-time decisions in subsurface applications (SMART) initiative, 2019 - 2029.
  46. NICE: Non-linear Independent Components Estimation. In International Conference on Learning Representations Workshop, May 2015.
  47. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE transactions on image processing, 13(4):600–612, 2004.
  48. Gerard T Schuster. Seismic inversion. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 2017.
  49. Full-waveform inversion with multisource frequency selection of marine streamer data. Geophysical Prospecting, 66(7):1243–1257, 2018.
  50. Marmousi, model and data. In EAEG workshop-practical aspects of seismic data inversion, pages cp–108. European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, 1990.
  51. Microsoft COCO: Common objects in context. In European conference on computer vision, pages 740–755. Springer, 2014.
  52. J. Wagoner. 3D Geologic Modeling of the Southern San Joaquin Basin for the Westcarb Kimberlina Demonstration Project- A Status Report. Technical Report LLNL-TR-412487, Lawrence Livermore National Laboraotry (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States), April 2009.
  53. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT leakage in drinking water aquifers. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90:102803, 2019.
  54. The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation. Advances in geophysics, 48:421–516, 2007.
  55. Absorbing boundary conditions for numerical simulation of waves. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 74(5):1765–1766, 1977.
  56. Decoupled weight decay regularization. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2018.
  57. Wasserstein gan. stat, 1050:26, 2017.
  58. Image complexity and spatial information. In 2013 Fifth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), pages 12–17. IEEE, 2013.
  59. Sparse representation-based image quality index with adaptive sub-dictionaries. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 25(8):3775–3786, 2016.
  60. Jianhua Lin. Divergence measures based on the shannon entropy. IEEE Transactions on Information theory, 37(1):145–151, 1991.
  61. Design of an image edge detection filter using the sobel operator. IEEE Journal of solid-state circuits, 23(2):358–367, 1988.
  62. What uncertainties do we need in bayesian deep learning for computer vision? Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017.
  63. Multiscale seismic waveform inversion. Geophysics, 60(5):1457–1473, 1995.
  64. Seismic imaging of complex onshore structures by 2d elastic frequency-domain full-waveform inversion. Geophysics, 74(6):WCC105–WCC118, 2009.
  65. Building starting models for full waveform inversion from wide-aperture data by stereotomography. Geophysical Prospecting, 61:109–137, 2013.
  66. Estimating a starting model for full-waveform inversion using a global optimization method. Geophysics, 81(4):R211–R223, 2016.
  67. Challenges in shallow target reconstruction by 3d elastic full-waveform inversion—which initial model? Geophysics, 86(4):R433–R446, 2021.
  68. Acquisition footprint—its detection and removal. CSEG Recorder, 25(8):16–20, 2000.
  69. PhaseNet: a deep-neural-network-based seismic arrival-time picking method. Geophysical Journal International, 216(1):261–273, 2019.
  70. Simultaneous full-waveform inversion for source wavelet and earth model. In 2009 SEG Annual Meeting. OnePetro, 2009.
  71. Microseismic imaging using a source function independent full waveform inversion method. Geophysical Journal International, 214(1):46–57, 2018.
Citations (32)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Github Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com