next up previous print clean
Next: Results Up: Brown: LSJIMP field data Previous: Combined Data and Model

Extension to non-seabed peglegs

Reflectors other than the seabed also produce pegleg multiples, and the strength of these events sometimes rivals, and even surpasses, the strength of the seabed peglegs. The Mississippi Canyon dataset, with its shallow tabular salt body, falls into this category. Figure [*] shows the stack of this data, with important reflectors and multiples labeled.

Computationally, the extension of this joint imaging method to include non-seabed peglegs is straightforward. We need only add an index for the multiple generating layer (m) to equation (2), where we model nsurf multiple-generating layers in the data.  
 \begin{displaymath}
\bold d = \bold N_0 \bold m_0
 + \sum_{i=1}^p \sum_{k=0}^i \...
 ...,m} \bold N_{i,k,m} \bold S_{i,m} \bold G_{i,m} \bold m_{i,k,m}\end{displaymath} (9)
Physically, however, modeling non-seabed peglegs requires some additional thinking. Notice that all modeling operators in equation (9) have an extra index. Brown (2003a) discusses how to extend the HEMNO operator ($\bold N_{i,k,m}$) to non-seabed peglegs, while Brown (2003b) discusses how to extend $\bold R_{i,m}$, $\bold S_{i,m}$, and $\bold G_{i,m}$.The regularization operators all remain the same, though non-seabed peglegs add additional crosstalk energy that must be modeled when the crosstalk weights are generated.


next up previous print clean
Next: Results Up: Brown: LSJIMP field data Previous: Combined Data and Model
Stanford Exploration Project
7/8/2003