Advertisement

Pure and Applied Geophysics

, Volume 173, Issue 2, pp 623–636 | Cite as

Application of Mixture of Gaussian Clustering on Joint Facies Interpretation of Seismic and Magnetotelluric Sections

  • Mohammad Ali Shahrabi
  • Hosein Hashemi
  • Mohammad Kazem Hafizi
Article
  • 217 Downloads

Abstract

Seismic and magnetotelluric (MT) methods are the most applicable geophysical methods in exploration of hydrocarbon resources. In this paper, mixture of Gaussian clustering is used to combine seismic and MT images under the scheme of Expectation/Maximization (EM) algorithm. Pre-Stack Depth Migration (PSDM) velocity, Root Mean Square (RMS) velocity and vertical gradient of RMS velocity of seismic and resistivity model of MT along 19.3 km MUN-21 profile in Munir Block that has been located in Southwest of Iran in Dezful embayment over the Seh-Qanat anticline are applied. The anticline is the most important oil trap of this area. The Expectation/Maximization (EM) method that has been applied includes: (1) creation of data vectors from the seismic and MT images using image processing techniques, (2) normalizing and mapping using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) procedure (3) unsupervised learning of dataset matrix, (4) setting the matrix in Expectation/Maximization (EM) iteration algorithm (5) remapping to physical space. The final model consists fof six classes which could be given to eight formations that belong to Eocene to Neocomian geological age. Pre-Stack Depth Migration (PSDM) velocity model obtained from seismic study on Seh-Qanat anticline only detected 2 horizons of formations, Asmari and Sarvak Formations; however, the current methodology introduces subdivision anticline into six classes by matching it to the log information of Seh-Qanat Deep-1 (SQD-1) borehole where it was excavated over the anticline with total depth of 2876 m.

Keywords

Mixture of Gaussian Expectation/Maximization clustering seismic magnetotelluric joint interpretation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Particular thanks to NIOC exploration directorate that supported this study by sharing the seismic and MT information. We wish to thank Gholam Reza Peyrovian and Ahmad Reza Dehzad for their support.

References

  1. Bauer, K. Munoz, G. Moeck, I. (2012). Pattern recognition and lithological interpretation of collocated seismic and magnetotelluric models using self-organizing maps. Geophys. J. Int, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05402.x.
  2. Bedrosian, P.A. Unsworth, M.J. Egbert G.D. Thurber, C.H. (2004). Geophysical images of the creeping segment of the San Andreas fault: implications for the role of crustal fluids in the earth-quake process, Tec.phys. 385, 137–158.Google Scholar
  3. Bedrosian, P.A. Maercklin, N. Weckmann, U. Bartov, Y. Ryberg, Y. Ritter, O. (2007). Lithology-derived structure classification from the joint interpretation of magnetotelluric and seismic models, Geophys. J. Int. 170, 737–748.Google Scholar
  4. Bennington, N.L. Zhang, H. Thurber, C.H. Bedrosian, P.A. (2010). Joint inversion of Vp, Vs, and resistivity at SAFOD, EOS, Trans. Am. geophys. Union, 91, Fall. Meet. Suppl., T41A–2084.Google Scholar
  5. Dempster, A.P. Laird, N.M. Rubin, D.B. (1997). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm, J. R. Stat. Soc. 39, 1–38.Google Scholar
  6. Han, M. Zhao, Y. Li, G. Reynolds, A.C. (2011). Application of EM algorithms for seismic facices classification, Comput. Geosci., 15, 421–429.Google Scholar
  7. Hartley, H.O. (1958). Maximum likelihood estimation from incomplete data, Biometrics, 14, 174–194.Google Scholar
  8. Heijden, F. Duin, R.P.W. De Ridder, D. Tax, D.M.J. (2004). Classification, parameter estimation and state estimation, an engineering approach using MATLAB, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp 234–241.Google Scholar
  9. Gallardo, L.A. Meju, A. (2007). Joint two-dimensional cross-gradient imaging of magnetotelluric and seismic travel time data for structural and lithological classification, Geophys. J. Int. 169, 1261–1272.Google Scholar
  10. Kuyuk, H. S. Yildirim. E. Dogan, E. Horasan, G. (2011). Application of k-means and Gaussian mixture classification of seismic activities in Istanbul, Nonlin Processes Geophys. 19, 411–419.Google Scholar
  11. Maurer, H. Curtis, A. Boerner, D. (2010). Recent advances in optimized geophysical survey design. Geophysics 75, 75A177–75A194.Google Scholar
  12. McNiece, G.W. Jones, A.G. (2001). Multisite, multifrequency tensor decomposition of magnetotelluric data. Geophysics, 66, 158–173.Google Scholar
  13. Moteie, H. (2010). Petroleum geology of Iran, Tehran: Arian Publications.Google Scholar
  14. Ogawa, Y. Uchida, T. (1996). A two-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion assuming Gaussian static shift. Geophys. J. Int. 126, 69–76.Google Scholar
  15. Rezaie, M.R. (2011). Petroleum geology of Iran, Tehran: Alavi Publications.Google Scholar
  16. Rodi, W., Mackie, R.L. (2001). Nonlinear conjugate gradients algorithm for 2-D magnetotelluric inversion. Geophysics 66, 174–187.Google Scholar
  17. Sahabi, F. (2012). Petroleum geology, Tehran: University of Tehran.Google Scholar
  18. Sasaki, Y. (2004). Three-dimensional inversion of static-shifted magnetotelluric data. Earth Planets Space, 56, 239–248.Google Scholar
  19. Stanley, W.D. Mooney, W.D. Fuis, G.S. (1990). Deep crustal structure of the Cascade Range and surrounding regions from seismic refraction and magnetotelluric data, J. geophys. 19, 419–438.Google Scholar
  20. Webb, A.R. (2002). Statistical pattern recognition, Malvern: John Wiley & Sons, 41–45.Google Scholar
  21. Zhao, Y., Li, G. Reynolds, A.C. (2007). Characterization of the measurement error in time-lapse seismic data and production data with an EM algorithm, Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 62. 181–193.Google Scholar
  22. Ziolkowski, A., Engelmark, F. (2009). Use of seismic and EM data for exploration, appraisal and reservoir characterization, AAPG search and discovery, 90171 CSPG/CSEG/CWLS.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Basel 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Ali Shahrabi
    • 1
  • Hosein Hashemi
    • 1
  • Mohammad Kazem Hafizi
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of GeophysicsUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations