Abstract
Interpretation of faults in seismic images is central to the creation of geological models of the subsurface. The use of prior knowledge acquired through learning allows interpreters to move from singular observations to reasoned interpretations based on the conceptual models available to them. The amount and variety of fault examples available in textbooks, articles and training exercises is therefore likely to be a determinant factor in the interpreters' ability to interpret realistic fault geometries in seismic data. We analysed the differences in fault type and geometry interpreted in seismic data by students before and after completing a masters module in structural geology, and compared them to the characteristics of faults represented in the module and textbooks. We propose that the observed over-representation of normal-planar faults in early teaching materials influences the interpretation of data, making this fault type and geometry dominant in the pre-module interpretations. However, when the students were exposed to a greater range in fault models in the module, the range of fault type and geometry increased. This work explores the role of model availability in interpretation and advocates for the use of realistic fault models in training materials.
Highlights
Reflection seismic imaging is a fundamental tool for understanding the structure of the Earth's crust
This paper investigates the influence of available fault examples in training material on the acquisition of interpretational skills by petroleum geoscience masters students taking a module in structural geology
We propose a similar effect caused by availability bias (Tversky and Kahneman, 1973, 1974) of fault models; textbook and teaching illustrations of faults dominate conceptualisation of a fault type and geometry, in this case biasing the interpretations towards normal planar faults
Summary
Reflection seismic imaging is a fundamental tool for understanding the structure of the Earth's crust. Despite the importance of seismic interpretation to subsurface geoscience, there are remarkably few studies of how interpretations themselves are performed e in marked contrast to the numerous technical studies of how the images themselves are created (e.g., Juhlin, 1995; Yilmaz, 2001; Campbell et al, 2010; Alcalde et al, 2013). The interpretation of seismic reflection data is the fundamental method for determining the geometry and displacement of faults in the subsurface at lithospheric to reservoir scales (e.g., Yielding et al., 1991; Tari et al, 1992; Underhill and Paterson, 1998; Simancas et al, 2003; Faulkner et al, 2010). Alcalde et al / Journal of Structural Geology 97 (2017) 161e171
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
