Modelling and interpretation is fast developing in capability and speed as a result of higher compute power and machine learning.
Henri Houllevigue et al examine how the same paradigm can support broader geological interpretation and discuss representative applications, including structural interpretation, depositional-element and geobody detection, and seismic facies classification.
Laurent Souche et al describe a trap and seal assessment workflow that is embedded in the seismic and DHI interpretation environment and that is built, in both its map-based and its three-dimensional forms, to honour structural traps (four-way and three-way closures) and stratigraphic traps together, on the same model that was interpreted.
Heinz Binder et al present a geological interpretation that demonstrates the considerable advantages of combining seismic and ERT methods to characterise the deposit geometry and internal structure.
Vita Kalashnikova et al demonstrate an algorithm that can invert post-stack seismic data into independent P-wave velocity and density cubes, which are subsequently converted into porosity and the Best Reservoir Quality attribute.
Neil Hodgson et al bring new observations and insights to deepwater systems to suggest that the deepwater Pelotas Basin model requires an overhaul.
Norman Mark presents a browser-based seismic data viewer as a way to quickly understand the structural geology of large volumes of seismic data for users who do not want to spend a lot of money on licensing fees and don’t want to install a gigantic software package.
Colette Lyle examines the Rakhine Basin using a series of 1D Basin Models to investigate both thermogenic and biogenic sources and also uses data, models, and regional geological knowledge to assess the likelihood of gas generation and investigate the relative timings of the key petroleum system elements.
