Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7582/GGE.2022.25.3.140

Comparison of Seismic Data Interpolation Performance using U-Net and cWGAN  

Yu, Jiyun (Department of Energy & Resources Engineering, Chonnam National University)
Yoon, Daeung (Department of Energy & Resources Engineering, Chonnam National University)
Publication Information
Geophysics and Geophysical Exploration / v.25, no.3, 2022 , pp. 140-161 More about this Journal
Abstract
Seismic data with missing traces are often obtained regularly or irregularly due to environmental and economic constraints in their acquisition. Accordingly, seismic data interpolation is an essential step in seismic data processing. Recently, research activity on machine learning-based seismic data interpolation has been flourishing. In particular, convolutional neural network (CNN) and generative adversarial network (GAN), which are widely used algorithms for super-resolution problem solving in the image processing field, are also used for seismic data interpolation. In this study, CNN-based algorithm, U-Net and GAN-based algorithm, and conditional Wasserstein GAN (cWGAN) were used as seismic data interpolation methods. The results and performances of the methods were evaluated thoroughly to find an optimal interpolation method, which reconstructs with high accuracy missing seismic data. The work process for model training and performance evaluation was divided into two cases (i.e., Cases I and II). In Case I, we trained the model using only the regularly sampled data with 50% missing traces. We evaluated the model performance by applying the trained model to a total of six different test datasets, which consisted of a combination of regular, irregular, and sampling ratios. In Case II, six different models were generated using the training datasets sampled in the same way as the six test datasets. The models were applied to the same test datasets used in Case I to compare the results. We found that cWGAN showed better prediction performance than U-Net with higher PSNR and SSIM. However, cWGAN generated additional noise to the prediction results; thus, an ensemble technique was performed to remove the noise and improve the accuracy. The cWGAN ensemble model removed successfully the noise and showed improved PSNR and SSIM compared with existing individual models.
Keywords
seismic data interpolation; machine learning; U-Net; cWGAN; ensemble;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Wang, Y., Wang, B., Tu, N., and Geng, J., 2020, Seismic trace interpolation for irregularly spatial sampled data using convolutional autoencoder, Geophysics, 85(2), V119-V130. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0699.1   DOI
2 Naghizadeh, M., and Sacchi, M. D., 2010, On sampling functions and Fourier reconstruction methods, Geophysics, 75(6), WB137-WB151. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3503577   DOI
3 Optiz, D., and Maclin, R., 1999, Popular ensemble methods: an empirical study, Journal of AIR, 11, 169-198. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.614   DOI
4 Porsani, M. J., 1999, Seismic trace interpolation using half-step prediction filters, Geophysics, 64(5), 1461-1467. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444650   DOI
5 Siahkoohi, A., Kumar, R., and Herrmann, F., 2018, Seismic Data Reconstruction with Genenrative Adversarial Networks, 80th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, 2018, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201801393   DOI
6 Wang, B., Zhang, N., Lu, W., and Wang, J., 2019, Deep-learning-based seismic data interpolation: A preliminary result, Geophysics, 84(1), V11-V20. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2017-0495.1   DOI
7 Wei, Q., Li, X. Y., and Song, M. P., 2021, De-aliased seismic data interpolation using conditional Wasserstein generative adversarial networks, Computer and Geosciences, 154, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2021.104801   DOI
8 Bae, W., Kwon, Y., and Ha, W., 2020, Research Trend analysis for Seismic Data Interpolation Methods using Machine Learning, Geophysics and Geophysical Exploration, 23(3), 192-207. https://doi.org/10.7582/GGE.2020.23.3.00192   DOI
9 Bauer, E., and Kohavi, R., 1999, An empirical comparison of voting classification algorithm: bagging, boosting, and variants, Machine Learning, 36(1-2), 105-142. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1007515423169   DOI
10 Choi, J., Byun, J., and Seol, S. J., 2014, Wavelet Based Matching Pursuit Method for Interpolation of Seismic Trace with Spatial Aliasing, Geophysics and Geophysical Exploration, 17(2), 88-94. https://doi.org/10.7582/GGE.2014.17.2.088   DOI
11 Dietterich, T. G., 2000a, An experimental comparison of decision trees: bagging, boosting, and randomization, Machine Learning, 40(2), 139-157. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1007607513941   DOI
12 Xu, S., Zhang, Y., and Lambare, G., 2010, Antileakage Fourier transform for seismic data regularization in higher dimentions, Geophysics, 75, WB113-WB120. https:doi.org/10.1190/1.1993713   DOI
13 Yang, P., Gao, J., and Chen, W., 2012, Curvelet-based POCS interpolation of nonuniformly sampled seismic records, Journal of Applied Geophysics, 79, 90-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.12.004   DOI
14 Kwak, S., and Kim, H., 2014, Comparison of ensemble pruning methods using Lasso-bagging and WAVE-bagging, Journal of the Korean Data & Information Science Society, 25(6), 1371-1383. https://doi.org/10.7465/jkdi.2014.25.6.1371   DOI
15 Ledig, C., Theis, L., Huszar, F., Caballero, J., Cunningham, A., Acosta, A., Aitken, A., Tejani, A., Totz, J., Wang, Z., and Shi, W., 2017, Photo-Realistic Single Image Super-Resolution Using a Generative Adversarial Network, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 5, 4681-4690. https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2017/html/Ledig_Photo-Realistic_Single_Image_CVPR_2017_paper.html
16 Wang, Z., Bovik, A. C., Sheikh, H. R., and Simoncelli, E. P., 2004, Image Quality Assessment: From Error Visibility to Structural Similarity, IEEE Transaction on Image Processing, 13(4), 600-612. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/1284395   DOI
17 Yang, A. Y., and Suh, J. H., 2003, Applying Spitz Trace Interpolation Algorithm for Seismic Data, Geophysics, 6(4), 171-179. https://koreascience.kr/article/JAKO200307921810193.page   DOI
18 Arjovsky, M., Chintala, S., and Bottou, L., 2017, Wasserstein Generative Adversarial Networks, Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR 70, 214-223. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v70/arjovsky17a.html
19 Dietterich, T. G., 2000b, Ensemble method in machine learning, LNCS, 1857, 1-15. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-45014-9_1   DOI
20 Lee, B., Yang, J., and Kim, S., 2009, Ensemble Learning of Regional Experts, Journal of KIISE, 15(2), 135-139. https://koreascience.kr/article/JAKO200907841292048.page
21 Mirza, M., and Osindero, S., 2014, Conditional Generative Adversarial Nets, arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.1784. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1411.1784   DOI
22 Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., and Brox, T., 2015, U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation, Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, 9351, 1-8. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28   DOI
23 Spitz, S., 1991, Seismic trace interpolation in the F-X domain, Geophysics, 56(6), 785-794. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443096   DOI
24 Breiman, L., 1996, Bagging predictors, Machine Learning, 24, 123-140. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00058655   DOI
25 Kim, B., Jeong, S., and Byun, J., 2012, Curvelet transform-based POCS in f-k domain, SEG Expanded Abstracts of the 82nd Annual International Meeting, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2012-1063.1   DOI
26 Isola, P., Zhu, J. Y., Zhou, T., and Efros, A. A., 2017, Image-to-Image Translation with Conditional Adversarial Networks, IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 1125-1134. https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2017/html/Isola_Image-To-Image_Translation_With_CVPR_2017_paper.html
27 Schonewille, M., Klaedtke, A., and Vigner, A., 2009, Anti-alias anti-leakage Fourier transform, SEG Expanded Abstracts of the 79th Annual International Meeting, 3249-3253. https://onepetro.org/SEGAM/proceedings-abstract/SEG09/All-SEG09/SEG-2009-3249/97241
28 Ji, J. and Choi, Y. G., 2010, 3D Seismic Data Processing Methodology using Public Domain Software System, Geophysics and Geophysical Exploration, 13(2), 159-168. https://koreascience.kr/article/JAKO201026359284114.page   DOI
29 Liu, B., and Sacchi, M. D., 2004, Minimum weighted norm interpolation of seismic records, Geophysics, 69(6), 1560-1568. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1836829   DOI