Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters

3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpr...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Robledo Carvajal, Francisca [verfasserIn] Butler, Robert W.H. [verfasserIn] Bond, Clare E. [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2023

Schlagwörter:	Faults Seismic interpretation Workflows Methods

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Journal of structural geology - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979, 177
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:177

DOI / URN:	10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976

Katalog-ID:	ELV065931238

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	ELV065931238
003	DE-627
005	20231205153415.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	231202s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)ELV065931238
035			\|a (ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rda
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 550 \|q VZ
084			\|a 38.36 \|2 bkl
100	1		\|a Robledo Carvajal, Francisca \|e verfasserin \|0 (orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178 \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters
264		1	\|c 2023
336			\|a nicht spezifiziert \|b zzz \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a 3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery.
650		4	\|a Faults
650		4	\|a Seismic interpretation
650		4	\|a Workflows
650		4	\|a Methods
700	1		\|a Butler, Robert W.H. \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Bond, Clare E. \|e verfasserin \|0 (orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901 \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Journal of structural geology \|d Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979 \|g 177 \|h Online-Ressource \|w (DE-627)303393122 \|w (DE-600)1494877-1 \|w (DE-576)095660127 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:177
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_U
912			\|a GBV_ELV
912			\|a SYSFLAG_U
912			\|a SSG-OPC-GGO
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_32
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_90
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_100
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_150
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_187
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_224
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_702
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2001
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2004
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2007
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2008
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2010
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2015
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2020
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2021
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2025
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2026
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2034
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2044
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2048
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2049
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2050
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2056
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2059
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2061
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2064
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2088
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2106
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2122
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2129
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2143
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2152
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2153
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2190
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2232
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2336
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2470
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2507
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4035
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4242
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4251
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4333
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4334
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4393
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
936	b	k	\|a 38.36 \|j Tektonik \|q VZ
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 177

Indexfelder

author_variant	c f r cf cfr r w b rw rwb c e b ce ceb
matchkey_str	robledocarvajalfranciscabutlerrobertwhbo:2023----:apnfuti3simcaaht
hierarchy_sort_str	2023
bklnumber	38.36
publishDate	2023
allfields	10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976 doi (DE-627)ELV065931238 (ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 550 VZ 38.36 bkl Robledo Carvajal, Francisca verfasserin (orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178 aut Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery. Faults Seismic interpretation Workflows Methods Butler, Robert W.H. verfasserin aut Bond, Clare E. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901 aut Enthalten in Journal of structural geology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979 177 Online-Ressource (DE-627)303393122 (DE-600)1494877-1 (DE-576)095660127 nnns volume:177 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 38.36 Tektonik VZ AR 177
spelling	10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976 doi (DE-627)ELV065931238 (ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 550 VZ 38.36 bkl Robledo Carvajal, Francisca verfasserin (orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178 aut Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery. Faults Seismic interpretation Workflows Methods Butler, Robert W.H. verfasserin aut Bond, Clare E. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901 aut Enthalten in Journal of structural geology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979 177 Online-Ressource (DE-627)303393122 (DE-600)1494877-1 (DE-576)095660127 nnns volume:177 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 38.36 Tektonik VZ AR 177
allfields_unstemmed	10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976 doi (DE-627)ELV065931238 (ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 550 VZ 38.36 bkl Robledo Carvajal, Francisca verfasserin (orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178 aut Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery. Faults Seismic interpretation Workflows Methods Butler, Robert W.H. verfasserin aut Bond, Clare E. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901 aut Enthalten in Journal of structural geology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979 177 Online-Ressource (DE-627)303393122 (DE-600)1494877-1 (DE-576)095660127 nnns volume:177 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 38.36 Tektonik VZ AR 177
allfieldsGer	10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976 doi (DE-627)ELV065931238 (ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 550 VZ 38.36 bkl Robledo Carvajal, Francisca verfasserin (orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178 aut Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery. Faults Seismic interpretation Workflows Methods Butler, Robert W.H. verfasserin aut Bond, Clare E. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901 aut Enthalten in Journal of structural geology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979 177 Online-Ressource (DE-627)303393122 (DE-600)1494877-1 (DE-576)095660127 nnns volume:177 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 38.36 Tektonik VZ AR 177
allfieldsSound	10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976 doi (DE-627)ELV065931238 (ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 550 VZ 38.36 bkl Robledo Carvajal, Francisca verfasserin (orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178 aut Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery. Faults Seismic interpretation Workflows Methods Butler, Robert W.H. verfasserin aut Bond, Clare E. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901 aut Enthalten in Journal of structural geology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979 177 Online-Ressource (DE-627)303393122 (DE-600)1494877-1 (DE-576)095660127 nnns volume:177 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 38.36 Tektonik VZ AR 177
language	English
source	Enthalten in Journal of structural geology 177 volume:177
sourceStr	Enthalten in Journal of structural geology 177 volume:177
format_phy_str_mv	Article
bklname	Tektonik
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Faults Seismic interpretation Workflows Methods
dewey-raw	550
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	Journal of structural geology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Robledo Carvajal, Francisca @@aut@@ Butler, Robert W.H. @@aut@@ Bond, Clare E. @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2023-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	303393122
dewey-sort	3550
id	ELV065931238
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV065931238</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20231205153415.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">231202s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV065931238</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">550</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">38.36</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Robledo Carvajal, Francisca</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Faults</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Seismic interpretation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Workflows</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Methods</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Butler, Robert W.H.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bond, Clare E.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of structural geology</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979</subfield><subfield code="g">177</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)303393122</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1494877-1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)095660127</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:177</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-GGO</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">38.36</subfield><subfield code="j">Tektonik</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">177</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Robledo Carvajal, Francisca
spellingShingle	Robledo Carvajal, Francisca ddc 550 bkl 38.36 misc Faults misc Seismic interpretation misc Workflows misc Methods Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters
authorStr	Robledo Carvajal, Francisca
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)303393122
format	electronic Article
dewey-ones	550 - Earth sciences
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut
collection	elsevier
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
topic_title	550 VZ 38.36 bkl Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters Faults Seismic interpretation Workflows Methods
topic	ddc 550 bkl 38.36 misc Faults misc Seismic interpretation misc Workflows misc Methods
topic_unstemmed	ddc 550 bkl 38.36 misc Faults misc Seismic interpretation misc Workflows misc Methods
topic_browse	ddc 550 bkl 38.36 misc Faults misc Seismic interpretation misc Workflows misc Methods
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Journal of structural geology
hierarchy_parent_id	303393122
dewey-tens	550 - Earth sciences & geology
hierarchy_top_title	Journal of structural geology
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)303393122 (DE-600)1494877-1 (DE-576)095660127
title	Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters
ctrlnum	(DE-627)ELV065931238 (ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1
title_full	Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters
author_sort	Robledo Carvajal, Francisca
journal	Journal of structural geology
journalStr	Journal of structural geology
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
dewey-hundreds	500 - Science
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2023
contenttype_str_mv	zzz
author_browse	Robledo Carvajal, Francisca Butler, Robert W.H. Bond, Clare E.
container_volume	177
class	550 VZ 38.36 bkl
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Robledo Carvajal, Francisca
doi_str_mv	10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976
normlink	(ORCID)0009-0005-7614-0178 (ORCID)0000-0003-1442-2901
normlink_prefix_str_mv	(orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178 (orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901
dewey-full	550
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	mapping faults in 3d seismic data – why the method matters
title_auth	Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters
abstract	3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery.
abstractGer	3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery.
abstract_unstemmed	3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters
remote_bool	true
author2	Butler, Robert W.H. Bond, Clare E.
author2Str	Butler, Robert W.H. Bond, Clare E.
ppnlink	303393122
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976
up_date	2024-07-07T00:44:40.072Z
_version_	1803879008252723200
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV065931238</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20231205153415.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">231202s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jsg.2023.104976</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV065931238</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0191-8141(23)00193-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">550</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">38.36</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Robledo Carvajal, Francisca</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0009-0005-7614-0178</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">3D seismic reflection imagery is the most widely used resource for interpreting the geometric structure of faults in the subsurface. Yet these endeavours carry uncertainties, the significance of which are rarely discussed. We explore how the application of different workflows yield different interpretations of a single high-quality 3D seismic image-set. We describe and apply five mapping workflows, based on 2D derivations of imagery to map an array of small-scale faults. Some workflows use vertical profiles, a conventional approach, others use plan views. We also vary the amount of under-sampling. Stacking the fault maps derived from the five workflows into a heat map shows broadly similar trends and distributions of faults irrespective of the workflow deployed. However, juxtaposition mapping reveals differences in fault length and network pattern (linkage and segmentation) arising from the different workflows. We quantify the total fault areas and distribution of fault lengths for each workflow – revealing significant differences in these statistics. Our results show that mapping strategies impact the interpretation of fault geometry, their network patterns and derived statistics. This understanding is critical for assessing and risking fault interpretations – deploying multiple workflows can reveal inherent uncertainty in structural interpretation of 3D seismic imagery.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Faults</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Seismic interpretation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Workflows</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Methods</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Butler, Robert W.H.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bond, Clare E.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-1442-2901</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of structural geology</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1979</subfield><subfield code="g">177</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)303393122</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1494877-1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)095660127</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:177</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-GGO</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">38.36</subfield><subfield code="j">Tektonik</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">177</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.401932

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Mapping faults in 3D seismic data – why the method matters

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?