Airwave Noise Identification from Seismic Data Using YOLOv5
Source abstract
Abstract
Airwave interference presents a major source of noise in seismic exploration, posing significant challenges to the quality control of raw seismic data. With the increasing data volume in 3D seismic exploration, manual identification methods fall short of meeting the demands of high-density 3D seismic surveys. This study employs the YOLOv5 model, a widely used tool in object detection, to achieve rapid identification of airwave noise in seismic profiles. Initially, the model was pre-trained on the COCO dataset—a large-scale dataset designed for object detection—and subsequently fine-tuned using a training set specifically labeled for airwave noise data. The fine-tuned model achieved an accuracy and recall rate of approximately 85% on the test dataset, successfully identifying not only the presence of noise but also its location, confidence levels, and range. To evaluate the model’s effectiveness, we applied the YOLOv5 model trained on 2D data to seismic records from two regions: 2D seismic data from Ningqiang, Shanxi, and 3D seismic data from Xiushui, Sichuan. The overall prediction accuracy in both regions exceeded 90%, with the accuracy and recall rates for airwave noise surpassing 83% and 90%, respectively. The evaluation time for single-shot 3D seismic data (over 8000 traces) was less than 2 s, highlighting the model’s exceptional transferability, generalization ability, and efficiency. These results demonstrate that the YOLOv5 model is highly effective for detecting airwave noise in raw seismic data across different regions, marking the first successful attempt at computer recognition of airwaves in seismic exploration.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Seismic Waves and Analysis · Seismology and Earthquake Studies · Geophysical Methods and Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Sinopec Petroleum Engineering Geophysics Co., Ltd., Southern Branch, Chengdu 610041, China
Yangtze Delta Region Institute, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Huzhou 313002, China
Funding
Sinopec Data Intelligent Collection Research Project · Huzhou Public Welfare Research Project
References (53)
Show source-provided references
1. Adaptive detection and suppression method for sub-frequency division of acoustic waves and strong energy interference
2. Mondol, N.H. (2015). Seismic exploration. Petroleum Geoscience: From Sedimentary Environments to Rock Physics, Springer Science & Business Media.10.1007/978-3-642-34132-8_17 ↗
3. The airwave in hammer reflection seismic data
4. Meunier, J. (2011). Seismic Acquisition from Yesterday to Tomorrow, Society of Exploration Geophysicists.10.1190/1.9781560802853 ↗
5. Talagapu, K.K. (2005). 2D and 3D Land Seismic Data Acquisition and Seismic Data Processing, Department of Geophysics, College of Science and Technology, Andhra University.
6. Data and model dual-driven seismic deconvolution via error-constrained joint sparse representation10.1190/geo2021-0311.1 ↗
7. Seismic acquisition quality monitoring under complex geological conditions
8. Luo, W. (2016). Research and Application of Seismic Data Acquisition Quality Control Technology. [Ph.D. Thesis, Southwest Petroleum University].
9. Research and application of field seismic data acquisition quality monitoring technology
10. On-site quality monitoring technology for seismic data acquisition
11. Deep-learning seismology10.1126/science.abm4470 ↗
12. Identifying microseismic events using a dual-channel CNN with wavelet packets decomposition coefficients10.1016/j.cageo.2022.105164 ↗
13. Quality classification and inversion of receiver functions using convolutional neural network10.1093/gji/ggac417 ↗
14. Study on the noise reduction method for semiaerial transient electromagnetic data based on LSTM
15. Fault recognition method and application based on 3D U-Net++convolution neural network
16. Denoising deep learning network based on singular spectrum analysis—DAS seismic data denoising with multichannel SVDDCNN
17. A Deep learning method for denoising based on a fast and flexible convolutional neural network
18. Comparative Study of the Performance of Seismic Waveform Denoising Methods Using Local and Near-Regional Data10.1785/0120220105 ↗
19. Li, S., Liu, B., Ren, Y., Chen, Y., Yang, S., Wang, Y., and Jiang, P. (2019). Deep-learning inversion of seismic data. arXiv.
20. Applications of supervised deep learning for seismic interpretation and inversion10.1190/tle38070526.1 ↗
21. Deep learning for high-resolution multichannel seismic impedance inversion10.1190/geo2023-0096.1 ↗
22. Fast forecasting of water-filled bodies position using transient electromagnetic method based on deep learning
23. Tang, R., Gan, L., Li, F., and Shen, F. (2024). A Fast Three-dimensional Imaging Scheme of Airborne Time Domain Electromagnetic Data using Deep Learning. TechRxiv.10.36227/techrxiv.171470721.15780746/v1 ↗
24. Object detection with deep learning: A review10.1109/TNNLS.2018.2876865 ↗
25. Deep learning for weakly-supervised object detection and localization: A survey10.1016/j.neucom.2022.01.095 ↗
26. Detecting mammals in UAV images: Best practices to address a substantially imbalanced dataset with deep learning10.1016/j.rse.2018.06.028 ↗
27. Kellenberger, B., Volpi, M., and Tuia, D. (2017, January 23–28). Fast animal detection in UAV images using convolutional neural networks. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, IGARSS 2017, Fort Worth, TX, USA.10.1109/IGARSS.2017.8127090 ↗
28. Distance transform regression for spatially-aware deep semantic segmentation10.1016/j.cviu.2019.102809 ↗
29. Redmon, J., and Farhadi, A. (2017, January 21–26). YOLO9000: Better, faster, stronger. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2017.690 ↗
30. Redmon, J., and Farhadi, A. (2018). Yolov3: An incremental improvement. arXiv.
31. Redmon, J., Divvala, S., Girshick, R., and Farhadi, A. (2016, January 27–30). You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2016.91 ↗
32. Bochkovskiy, A. (2020). YOLOv4: Optimal Speed and Accuracy of Object Detection. arXiv.
33. Jocher (2024, December 01). YOLOv5 by Ultralytics. Available online: https://github.com/ultralytics/yolov5.
34. YOLO-DCANet: Seismic velocity spectrum picking method based on deformable convolution and attention mechanism
35. Pang, D., Liu, G., He, J., Li, W., and Fu, R. (2022). Automatic remote sensing identification of co-seismic landslides using deep learning methods. Forests, 13.10.3390/f13081213 ↗
36. Zhu, X., and Shragge, J. (2022). Toward real-time microseismic event detection using the YOLOv3 algorithm. Earth arXiv, preprint.10.31223/X5TP7D ↗
37. Detection and assessment of post-earthquake functional building ceiling damage based on improved YOLOv810.1016/j.jobe.2024.111315 ↗
38. Efficient seismic numerical modeling technique using the yolov2-based expanding domain method
39. Automatic arrival-time picking of P- and S-waves of microseismic events based on object detection and CNN10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107560 ↗
40. Park, S., Kim, J., Jeon, K., Kim, J., and Park, S. (2021). Improvement of gpr-based rebar diameter estimation using yolo-v3. Remote Sens., 13.10.3390/rs13102011 ↗
41. Ilmak, D., Iban, M.C., and Şeker, D.Z. (2024, January 7–12). A Geospatial Dataframe of Collapsed Buildings in Antakya City after the 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes Using Object Detection Based on Yolo and VHR Satellite Images. Proceedings of the IGARSS 2024—2024 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, Athens, Greece.10.1109/IGARSS53475.2024.10642920 ↗
42. Li, J., Meng, J.B., and Li, P. (2024). Detecting the Bull’s-Eye Effect in Seismic Inversion Low-Frequency Models Using the Optimized YOLOv7 Model. Appl. Geophys., 1–11.10.1007/s11770-024-1118-3 ↗
43. Deep learning and stereo vision based detection of post-earthquake fire geolocation for smart cities within the scope of disaster management: İstanbul case10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103906 ↗
44. Zhang, Y., Guo, Z., Wu, J., Tian, Y., Tang, H., and Guo, X. (2022). Real-time vehicle detection based on improved YOLO v5. Sustainability, 14.10.3390/su141912274 ↗
45. Khanam, R., and Hussain, M. (2024). What is YOLOv5: A deep look into the internal features of the popular object detector. arXiv.
46. Chen, F., Zhang, L., Kang, S., Chen, L., Dong, H., Li, D., and Wu, X. (2023). Soft-NMS-enabled YOLOv5 with SIOU for small water surface floater detection in UAV-captured images. Sustainability, 15.10.3390/su151410751 ↗
47. Adaptive margin aware complement-cross entropy loss for improving class imbalance in multi-view sleep staging based on eeg signals10.1109/TNSRE.2022.3213848 ↗
48. Ding, J., Cao, H., Ding, X., and An, C. (2022). High accuracy real-time insulator string defect detection method based on improved YOLOv5. Front. Energy Res., 10.10.3389/fenrg.2022.928164 ↗
49. YOLOv5-Tassel: Detecting tassels in RGB UAV imagery with improved YOLOv5 based on transfer learning10.1109/JSTARS.2022.3206399 ↗
50. Sharma, A., Pathak, J., Prakash, M., and Singh, J.N. (2021, January 17–18). Object detection using OpenCV and python. Proceedings of the 2021 3rd international Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication Control and Networking (ICAC3N), Greater Noida, India.10.1109/ICAC3N53548.2021.9725638 ↗
51. Applications of machine learning methods for engineering risk assessment—A review10.1016/j.ssci.2019.09.015 ↗
52. Shi, Y., Liao, J., Gan, L., and Tang, R. (2024). Lithofacies Prediction from Well Log Data Based on Deep Learning: A Case Study from Southern Sichuan, China. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14188195 ↗
53. Gan, L., Tang, R., Li, F., and Shen, F. (2024). A Deep learning estimation for probing Depth of Transient Electromagnetic Observation. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14167123 ↗