Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for target‐oriented and interval‐oriented amplitude versus angle inversions with non‐parametric priors and non‐linear forward modellings

Abstract

ABSTRACTIn geophysical inverse problems, the posterior model can be analytically assessed only in case of linear forward operators, Gaussian, Gaussian mixture, or generalized Gaussian prior models, continuous model properties, and Gaussian‐distributed noise contaminating the observed data. For this reason, one of the major challenges of seismic inversion is to derive reliable uncertainty appraisals in cases of complex prior models, non‐linear forward operators and mixed discrete‐continuous model parameters. We present two amplitude versus angle inversion strategies for the joint estimation of elastic properties and litho‐fluid facies from pre‐stack seismic data in case of non‐parametric mixture prior distributions and non‐linear forward modellings. The first strategy is a two‐dimensional target‐oriented inversion that inverts the amplitude versus angle responses of the target reflections by adopting the single‐interface full Zoeppritz equations. The second is an interval‐oriented approach that inverts the pre‐stack seismic responses along a given time interval using a one‐dimensional convolutional forward modelling still based on the Zoeppritz equations. In both approaches, the model vector includes the facies sequence and the elastic properties of P‐wave velocity, S‐wave velocity and density. The distribution of the elastic properties at each common‐mid‐point location (for the target‐oriented approach) or at each time‐sample position (for the time‐interval approach) is assumed to be multimodal with as many modes as the number of litho‐fluid facies considered. In this context, an analytical expression of the posterior model is no more available. For this reason, we adopt a Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm to numerically evaluate the posterior uncertainties. With the aim of speeding up the convergence of the probabilistic sampling, we adopt a specific recipe that includes multiple chains, a parallel tempering strategy, a delayed rejection updating scheme and hybridizes the standard Metropolis–Hasting algorithm with the more advanced differential evolution Markov chain method. For the lack of available field seismic data, we validate the two implemented algorithms by inverting synthetic seismic data derived on the basis of realistic subsurface models and actual well log data. The two approaches are also benchmarked against two analytical inversion approaches that assume Gaussian‐mixture‐distributed elastic parameters. The final predictions and the convergence analysis of the two implemented methods proved that our approaches retrieve reliable estimations and accurate uncertainties quantifications with a reasonable computational effort.