MA_W-Net-Based Dual-Output Method for Microseismic Localization in Strong Noise Environments
Source abstract
Abstract
With the continuous depletion of conventional oil and gas reservoir resources, the beginning of exploration and development of unconventional oil and gas reservoir resources has led to the rapid development of microseismic monitoring technology. Addressing the challenges of low signal-to-noise ratio and inaccurate localization in microseismic data, we propose a new neural network MA_W-Net based on the U-Net network with the following improvements: (1) The foundational U-Net model was refined by evolving the single-channel decoder into a two-channel decoder, aimed at enhancing microseismic event localization and noise suppression capabilities. (2) The integration of attention mechanisms such as the convolutional block attention module (CBAM), coordinate attention (CA), and squeeze-and-excitation (SE) into the encoder to bolster feature extraction. We use synthetic data for evaluating the proposed method. Comparing with the normal U-net network, our accuracy in seismic recordings with a signal-to-noise ratio of −15 is improved from 78 percent to 93.5 percent, and the average error is improved from 2.60 m to 0.76 m. The results show that our method can accurately localize microseismic events and denoising processes from microseismic records with a low signal-to-noise ratio.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Seismology and Earthquake Studies · Seismic Waves and Analysis · Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
College of Geoexploration Science and Technology, Jilin University, Xi Min Zhu Street No. 938, Changchun 130026, China
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (35)
Show source-provided references
1. Hydraulic-fracturing controlled dynamics of microseismic clouds10.1029/2006GL026365 ↗
2. Petroleum reservoir characterization using downhole microseismic monitoring10.1190/1.3477966 ↗
3. Direct and Microseismic Observations of Hydraulic Fracturing in Barre Granite and Opalinus Clayshale10.1029/2019JB018376 ↗
4. Microseismic imaging of a geothermal reservoir stimulation10.1190/1.2954024 ↗
5. Microseismic reflection imaging and its application to the Basel geothermal reservoir10.1190/geo2014-0593.1 ↗
6. Application of waveform tomography to a crooked-line 2D land seismic data set10.1190/geo2014-0537.1 ↗
7. It’s a matter of size: Magnitude and moment estimates for microseismic data10.1190/1.3353726 ↗
8. Eisner, L., Abbott, D., Barker, W.B., Lakings, J., and Thornton, M.P. (2008). Noise suppression for detection and location of microseismic events using a matched filter. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2008, Proceedings of the 78th Society of Exploration Geophysicists International Exposition and Annual Meeting (SEG LAS VEGAS 2008), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 9–14 November 2008, Society of Exploration Geophysicists.10.1190/1.3059184 ↗
9. Radon transform-based microseismic event detection and signal-to-noise ratio enhancement10.1016/j.jappgeo.2014.12.008 ↗
10. A method for low-frequency noise suppression based on mathematical morphology in microseismic monitoring10.1190/geo2015-0222.1 ↗
11. Deep learning10.1038/nature14539 ↗
12. Zhang, C., and van der Baan, M. (2019). Microseismic and seismic noise attenuation by supervised deep learning with noisy natural images. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2019, Proceedings of the 89th Society of Exploration Geophysicists International Exposition and Annual Meeting 2019, San Antonio, TX, USA, 15–20 September 2019, Society of Exploration Geophysicists.10.1190/segam2019-3213158.1 ↗
13. Uncovering the microseismic signals from noisy data for high-fidelity 3D source-location imaging using deep learning10.1190/geo2021-0021.1 ↗
14. Automated Event Detection and Denoising Method for Passive Seismic Data Using Residual Deep Convolutional Neural Networks10.1109/TGRS.2021.3054071 ↗
15. Denoising the Optical Fiber Seismic Data by Using Convolutional Adversarial Network Based on Loss Balance10.1109/TGRS.2020.3036065 ↗
16. Seismic Shot Gather Denoising by Using Supervised-Deep-Learning Method with Weak Dependence on Real Noise Data: A Solution to the Lack of Real Noise Data10.1007/s10712-022-09702-7 ↗
17. Convolutional neural network for earthquake detection and location10.1126/sciadv.1700578 ↗
18. Deep Learning for Efficient Microseismic Location Using Source Migration-Based Imaging10.1029/2021JB022649 ↗
19. Direct microseismic event location and characterization from passive seismic data using convolutional neural networks10.1190/geo2020-0636.1 ↗
20. Localizing microseismic events on field data using a U-Net-based convolutional neural network trained on synthetic data10.1190/geo2020-0868.1 ↗
21. Microseismic Source Location Using Deep Reinforcement Learning10.1109/TGRS.2022.3182991 ↗
22. An overview of multi-task learning10.1093/nsr/nwx105 ↗
23. U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation
24. Deep-learning inversion: A next-generation seismic velocity model building method10.1190/geo2018-0249.1 ↗
25. Alfarhan, M., Deriche, M., Maalej, A., AlRegib, G., and Al-Marzouqi, H. (2020, January 25–28). Multiple Events Detection In Seismic Structures Using a Novel U-Net Variant. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.10.1109/ICIP40778.2020.9190682 ↗
26. Common-azimuth seismic data fault analysis using residual UNet10.1190/INT-2019-0173.1 ↗
27. Ferrari, V., Hebert, M., Sminchisescu, C., and Weiss, Y. (2018). CBAM: Convolutional Module Attention Module. Computer Vision—ECCV 2018, Proceedings of the 15th European Conference, Munich, Germany, 8–14 September 2018, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-01249-6 ↗
28. Hou, Q., Zhou, D., and Feng, J. (2021, January 20–25). Coordinate Attention for Efficient Mobile Network Design. Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Nashville, TN, USA.10.1109/CVPR46437.2021.01350 ↗
29. Hu, J., Shen, L., and Sun, G. (2018, January 18–23). Squeeze-and-Excitation Networks. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2018.00745 ↗
30. Graham, B. (2024, April 03). Fractional Max-Pooling. ar5iv. Available online: https://ar5iv.labs.arxiv.org/html/1412.6071.
31. A Flexible Sigmoid Function of Determinate Growth10.1093/aob/mcg029 ↗
32. Marmousi2: An elastic upgrade for Marmousi10.1190/1.2172306 ↗
33. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2024, April 02). Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. arXiv, 29 January 2017. Available online: http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980.
34. Locating induced earthquakes with a network of seismic stations in Oklahoma via a deep learning method10.1038/s41598-020-58908-5 ↗
35. Lehtinen, J., Munkberg, J., Hasselgren, J., Laine, S., Karras, T., Aittala, M., and Aila, T. (2018, January 10–15). Noise2Noise: Learning Image Restoration without Clean Data. Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning, Stockholm, Sweden.