Geophysical Corner

Extracting Information From Texture Attributes

Figure 1 – Comparison of strat slices through (a) input seismic amplitude, (b) coherence, (c) GLCM energy, (d) GLCM entropy and (e) GLCM homogeneity attributes. On 1(f), a chair display with the vertical seismic amplitude correlated with a horizontal strat-slice through the most-positive curvature (long-wavelength) volume. The channel features are seen better defined on the texture attribute displays than the seismic display.
Figure 1 – Comparison of strat slices through (a) input seismic amplitude, (b) coherence, (c) GLCM energy, (d) GLCM entropy and (e) GLCM homogeneity attributes. On 1(f), a chair display with the vertical seismic amplitude correlated with a horizontal strat-slice through the most-positive curvature (long-wavelength) volume. The channel features are seen better defined on the texture attribute displays than the seismic display.

There are a number of seismic attributes that are derived from seismic amplitudes to facilitate the interpretation of geologic structure, stratigraphy and rock/pore fluid properties.

The earliest attributes were extracted by treating seismic amplitudes as analytic signals for aiding feature identification and interpretation.

As the computation of these attributes is carried out at each sample of the seismic trace, they are referred to as instantaneous attributes.

This development was followed by attributes that are derived by transforming seismic amplitudes into impedance or velocity.

Also called seismic impedance inversion attributes, these attributes yield lithology or fluid information that can be calibrated with well logs.

A third class of attributes quantifies the lateral changes in waveform using an ensemble of windowed traces in the inline and crossline directions.

Such geometric attributes include dip, coherence and curvature, and are routinely used to accelerate and quantify the interpretation of faults, fractures and folds from 3-D seismic data.

While texture attributes are less familiar to seismic interpreters, seismic texture forms the basis of seismic stratigraphy, giving rise to descriptions of “concordant,” “blocky,” “hummocky” and “chaotic” pictures.

Quantitative texture analysis is one of the primary tools in remote sensing of forestry, agriculture and urban planning.

The classic definition of texture defines a window, such as the human thumb, sampling subtle changes in elevation. Rubbing your thumb across nearby surfaces may give rise to textures you may describe as smooth, rough, silky, corrugated, wavy or chaotic.

Most people can easily recognize pine, oak, maple, ash, mahogany, teak and many other woods from their grain, but may have difficulty explaining how they are able to distinguish them.

For this reason, it is difficult to teach a computer to recognize such patterns.

Most remote sensing and industrial applications use statistical measures of the gray-level co-occurrence matrix, or GLCM, which measures the repetition of a pattern from point-to-point.

Thus a “brick pattern” in North America would have mortar every 12 inches horizontally and four inches vertically.

GLCM seismic analysis might search for vertical patterns such as onlap, frequency and parallelism.


In this article we search for lateral patterns in the seismic data along structural dip.

We find three texture attributes to be the most useful in extracting lateral changes in reflectivity. They are:

  • GLCM energy.
  • GLCM entropy.
  • GLCM homogeneity.

Somewhat confusingly, the GLCM energy is a measure of the energy of the GLCM matrix and not of the seismic data itself.

For this reason, a checkerboard pattern, which has many adjacent red and black pixels, will have high GLCM energy, high homogeneity and low entropy. A smooth pattern will have high homogeneity, moderate energy and low entropy.

We illustrate the application of these texture attributes and their usefulness on an area in south central Alberta, Canada.

In figure 1a we see a strat slice through a seismic volume showing some Mannville channels. Not all these channels are incised, as the main channel on the left (blue arrow) is seen to have a signature somewhat different from the channel seen to the right and indicated with a green arrow. This is because of the greater measure of differential compaction noticed on the curvature strat slice (shown in figure 1f), and described in the July 2012 Geophysical Corner.

This main channel is seen to have a definite outline in blue on the seismic display, and at the location of the pink arrow it merges with the vertical channel to the right (green arrow), which appears to have undergone lesser differential compaction.

A thin vertical channel seen on the seismic amplitude display in figure 1a (yellow arrow) is seen with a better definition on the coherence.

While coherence shows the edges of the channel, it gives little indication of the heterogeneity or uniformity of the channel fill. Notice the clear definition of this channel on the three texture attributes shown in figures 1c-e, especially the complete thin high entropy, low homogeneity N-S running channel seen in figures 1d and e.

We interpret a similar high entropy, low homogeneity feature in figures 1d and e to be a point bar in the middle of the incised valley (green arrows). This internal architecture was not delineated by coherence.

Conclusions

Unlike geometric attributes, which are clearly linked to faults, folds and fractures, texture attributes are more difficult to interpret.

In remote sensing of forestry and agriculture, calibration is obtained by control sites, with a human being visiting a given location and literally providing ground truth.

In seismic texture the ground truth is provided by well control, interpreter experience and an understanding of geologic processes.

Comments (0)

 

Geophysical Corner

Geophysical Corner - Satinder Chopra
Satinder Chopra, award-winning chief geophysicist (reservoir), at Arcis Seismic Solutions, Calgary, Canada, and a past AAPG-SEG Joint Distinguished Lecturer began serving as the editor of the Geophysical Corner column in 2012.

Geophysical Corner - Kurt Marfurt
AAPG member Kurt J. Marfurt is with the University of Oklahoma, Norman, Okla.

Geophysical Corner

The Geophysical Corner is a regular column in the EXPLORER that features geophysical case studies, techniques and application to the petroleum industry.

VIEW COLUMN ARCHIVES


See Also: Book

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/book-s56-atlas-deep-water-outcrops-hero.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4440 Book

See Also: Bulletin Article

Size fractions (<4 and 0.4–1.0 μ) of Brent Group sandstones from the northern North Sea contain mostly illite-smectite mixed layers with kaolinite, whereas the same size fractions of Fulmar Formation sandstones from the south-central North Sea consist of illite-smectite mixed layers with minor chlorite. Transmission electron microscope observations show elongated illite laths or agglomerates consisting of small laths when larger individual laths are lacking.

The K-Ar data of the fractions less than 0.4 μm of Brent Group samples plot on two arrays in a 40Ar/36Ar vs. 40K/36Ar diagram that have isochron characteristics with ages of 76.5 ± 4.2 and 40.0 ± 1.5 Ma, and initial 40Ar/36Ar ratios of 253 ± 16 and 301 ± 18, respectively. For the Fulmar Formation samples, the data points of the fractions less than 0.2 and less than 0.4 μ also fit two isochrons with ages of 76.6 ± 1.4 and 47.9 ± 0.5 Ma and initial 40Ar/36Ar ratios of 359 ± 52 and 304 ± 2, respectively. Some of the coarser 0.4–1.0-μ fractions also plot on the two isochrons, but most plot above indicating the presence of detrital components more than 0.4 μ. The almost identical ages obtained from illite-type crystals of sandstones with different deposition ages that are located about 600 km (373 mi) apart record two simultaneous illitization episodes. These events were not induced by local burial conditions, but are related to episodic pressure and/or temperature increases in the studied reservoirs, probably induced by hydrocarbon injection. This interpretation is indirectly supported by notably different K-Ar illite ages from cores of a nearby reservoir at hydrostatic pressure.

Illite is not as well crystallized as expected for potential crystallization temperatures above 160°C measured by fluid-inclusion determinations. In both the northern and south-central North Sea, the two illite generations remain unaffected after crystallization despite continued burial, suggesting notably higher crystallization temperatures than those estimated from geothermal gradients. No recent illite crystallization or alteration is recorded in the K-Ar ages, despite a dramatic regional acceleration of the subsidence in the southern North Sea. ±

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/episodic-and-simultanneous-illitization-in-oil.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 5724 Bulletin Article

In this study, seismic models and a Starfak and Tiger Shoal fields data set in the Gulf of Mexico Basin are used to investigate uncertainties caused by the frequency dependence of seismic data and solutions for avoiding pitfalls in seismic-stratigraphic and facies interpretation. Seismic amplitude and instantaneous attributes, along with stratigraphic interpretation of these attributes, are controlled by seismic interference, or tuning, between thin geologic units. Seismic-tuning effects include thickness tuning and frequency tuning, which cause nonlinear variations of reflection amplitude and instantaneous seismic attributes with thickness and/or data frequency. Seismic modeling shows that, whereas thickness tuning determines seismic-interference patterns and, therefore, occurrence of seismic events and seismic facies in layered rock, frequency tuning may further influence the nature of the correlation of seismic data and geologic time and modify seismic facies. Frequency dependence offers a new dimension of seismic data, which has not been fully used in seismic interpretation of geology.

Field-data examples demonstrate that a stratigraphic formation is typically composed of lithofacies of varying thicknesses, and a broadband, stacked seismic data set is not necessarily optimal for stratigraphic and facies interpretation. Although it is difficult to predict correct frequency components for interpretation of not-yet-known geologic targets, local geologic models and well data can be used to optimize the frequency components of seismic data to a certain degree and intentionally modify seismic-interference patterns and seismic facies for better seismic interpretation of geologic surfaces, sediment-dispersal patterns, geomorphology, and sequence stratigraphy.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/frequency-dependent-seismic.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3609 Bulletin Article

See Also: CD DVD

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4561 CD-DVD

See Also: Online e Symposium

Explore three of the great wonders of the geological world. Take a guided tour of classic geological sites on the Colorado Plateau.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/oc-es-virtual-field-trip-grand-canyon-bryce-and-zion.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3812 Online e-Symposium