Quantifiable Elements of Seismic Image Fidelity: A Tutorial Review

The interpretability of seismic images of Earth’s interior properties relies on the quantifiable level of image fidelity. We recommend evaluating seismic image fidelity via three quantifiable elements: image resolution, artifact level, and position accuracy. Though the resolution of seismic images is routinely assessed, it is difficult to detect deceiving image artifacts or evaluate the accuracy of image position beyond the drilling limit. Many image artifacts, such as fake or distorted features, are generated by mistaking the signals in the imaging process or due to limitations in seismic illumination and imaging methods. Most image position errors are produced by erroneous velocity models used in seismic imaging. To ensure seismic image fidelity, we should establish practical evaluation standards during the processes of making and interpreting seismic images. For mitigating image artifacts and position errors, we should analyze their causes and follow practical rules, such as “from known to unknown”, in evaluating and interpreting seismic images.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Geosciences
Published
2025-11-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences15120445
Primary Topic
Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Quantifiable Elements of Seismic Image Fidelity: A Tutorial Review

Hua‐Wei Zhou, Yinshuai Ding, Yukai Wo, Hao Hu et al.
Geosciences
Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
article

Quantifiable Elements of Seismic Image Fidelity: A Tutorial Review

Hua‐Wei Zhou, Yinshuai Ding, Yukai Wo, Hao Hu, Zhihui Zou, Lelin Sun
article en

Abstract

The interpretability of seismic images of Earth’s interior properties relies on the quantifiable level of image fidelity. We recommend evaluating seismic image fidelity via three quantifiable elements: image resolution, artifact level, and position accuracy. Though the resolution of seismic images is routinely assessed, it is difficult to detect deceiving image artifacts or evaluate the accuracy of image position beyond the drilling limit. Many image artifacts, such as fake or distorted features, are generated by mistaking the signals in the imaging process or due to limitations in seismic illumination and imaging methods. Most image position errors are produced by erroneous velocity models used in seismic imaging. To ensure seismic image fidelity, we should establish practical evaluation standards during the processes of making and interpreting seismic images. For mitigating image artifacts and position errors, we should analyze their causes and follow practical rules, such as “from known to unknown”, in evaluating and interpreting seismic images.

GeosciencesVol. 15(12)
University of Helsinki (FI), Southwest Petroleum University (CN), University of Houston (US), Ocean University of China (CN), University of Oklahoma (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.