Volume 36 June 1971 Number 3

GEOPHYSICS

TOWARD A UNIFIED THEORY OF REFLECTOR MAPPlNGt

Schemes for seismic mapping of reflectors in mula in\olving up antl downgoing \vaves. The
the presence of an arbitrary velocity model, dip mapping formula may be implemented without
ping and cur\,ed reflectors, diffractions, ghosts, undue complexity hy means of difference ap
surface elevation variations, and multiple reflec- proximations to the relativistic Schroedinger
tions are reviewed and reduced to a single for- equation.

INTRODUCTION The reflector mapping principle was stated in

Ulen the depth to a seismic reflector is greater terms of a single shot. If more shots are present,
than some radius of curvature of the reflector, they may illuminate more reflectors and enhance
localized information in a depth section is spread the signal-to-noise ratio. After a reflector map is
o\.er a time section by focusing and diffraction made from each of several shots, the maps may he
effects Even if the reflection is too \veak to I,c compared. If they arc different in some systematic
seen in the time section, the following principle \~a?-, they may he used to impro\,c iteratively the
may he used to calculate a depth section: T<- velocity model. Such improvement of the velocity
ptTt0r.scsist trt points ilL t/w grolrrzddtcw the_fir.sf model is not the object of this paper: \YC shall
urrizul oj the downgoiug wme is time coincident concern ourselves \rith the narrower problem of
with ~IJZupgoing -wu’ilc. This idea is depicted in making a reflector map in the presence of a rea-
Figure 1. Kormal moveout, impulse holography, sonably \vell known, though perhaps complicated,
and the difference equation method descrihctl II> velocity model. I)ata may be corrected for static
the author last year (Claerhout, lu)iOa, hereafter errors in conjunction \vith reflector mapping.
called paper 1) are specializations of this prin- Finally, the mapping procedure T\-e shall ul-
ciple. The same principle can hc expressed in timatcly suggest is a linear function of the data.
various formulas which may he used to construct This linearity \rill guarantee that even for data
reflector maps from field data. By a reflector map, \vith a poor signal-to-noise ratio the maps may IIc
\r-e shall mean the end result of any processing stacked to improve the ratio; however, \vc shall
0i seismic data which purports to indicate loca- consider stacking schemes only briefly.
tions of reflectors. ;\ crude example of a reflector
SPECIALIZING THE MAPPING FORMULA
map is a seismogram with the time axis relabeled
to in,dicate reflector depth according to some as- ‘die basic principle of reflector mapping ma>
sumed velocity model. be expressed by the formula

t Presented at the Pacific Coast Section meeting of the So&t>, of Exploration Geophysicists at Bakersfield, Cali-
fornia, October 20, 19iO. Manuscript received hy the Editor L\pril 6. 1970; revised manuscript received October 5,
1970.
* Geophysics Department, Stanford University, Stanford, California 91303
@ 1971 by the Society of Exploration Geophysicists. .\I1 rights reserved.

467
468 Claerbout
l‘rc. 1. Illustration of the basic principle of reflector
mapping. There is a near-surface source S and man?
surface receivers K. Xt a shallow depth above the re-
flector at the t>-pical point PI the downgoing wave 11,
occurs much earlier than the upcoming wave l_,. The
upgoing wave 1II represents energ!. which has traveled
from the source to one or more places on the reflector
and then back up to the point P,. .It a point P2. which
is at or near a reflecting interface of arbitrar!. shape.
there will he overlal) in time of the down and upgoing
naves I)? and 1’2. The time overlap may I)e used in the
construction of a map of reflector positions. Below the
reflector at the point PB, there is, in principle. no up
coming wave. However, practical schemes for estimat-
ing the upcoming waves I: at various depths in large
part amount to shifting the upcoming waves seen at I?
to earlier and earlier times correqwnding to greater and
greater depths. Since the practical schemes will have no
knowledge of the interface, they will predict an erro-
neous upcoming wave lTr at E‘3, indicated I)>-dots lxfore
the arrival of the downgoing wave. This error has no
bad effect on the reflector mapping formulas which
utilize time coincidence of up and downgoing waves.
These ideas are valid in situations where there are man!
reflectors at many depths.
Map(s, 2) = U(n-, 2, fa),‘ct(s, z, f,,), (1)
where .c is the horizontal coordinate, z is the
vertical coordinate, td is the time of first arrival
on the do\vngoing wave d(.r, z, t), and U(S, z, t) is
the upcoming wave. It is obvious that at points
in space where there is no reflector, ZL(.Y,z, t) will
vanish both before and immediately after f,l.
However, if a reflector is present at a particular
point (x, z), Map(.r, 2) will take on the value of
the reflection coefficient at that point. Of course,
reflection coefficients are functions of angle of in-
cidence, so Map(s, z) as we have defined it with
equation (1) is not strictly a material property
invariant to changes in source location. This
slight amplitude ambiguity in Map(s, z) is ignored
because of the many more severe amplitude
problems which will arise in the calculation of
u(.Y, z, t) and dis, z, t) from surface observations.
A1mplitudes I\-ill have very little meaning after we
deal \vi th attenuation and scattering in
Lveathered layers. E\-cn ii Ire can avoid using
automatic gain control (.1GC) in data recording
and processing, we \\-ill in the end have to ube
something like ;\C;C in graphical display. The
most essential information in 1Iap(.~, z) is in the
phase; that is, in the shapes and dips oi the rc-
flcctors and the regions of coherence and the rc-
gions of noise.
Use of equation (1) involves choosing the onset
time on the downgoing wave. Since this may be a
tricky matter, we next see ho\~ it can be avoided
altogether if we are \villing to assume that the
do\\ngoing wave is minimum phase. Let us sup-
pose that time functions are sampled so that we
may speak of their Z-transforms. Further, let us
choose the origin time at l,i. ‘I’hen I\-e have for
upgolng and doxvngoing \va\.es
1 .(Z) = IL,,+ UJ + ?l:Z” + and (2a)
D(Z) = (i,, + dl% + dz%’ + . (lb)
11ap as defined I)!- equation (I) is the sanic as
~“,:‘d,~. \Ve shall see that if D(Z) is minimum phase,
SIap(s, 2) may bc given as
s
~hp(.v, z) = L.(Z) D(Z)tlw. (J)
Expanding out the inverse of D(Z), we get
,\Iap(.v, i)
=
S (zQ,‘tl”(l+( )z+( )Z’f . .))dw.
I’o\vers of 2 (except Z to the zero) oscillate on the
unit circle (real w), so that on integration \vc get
l\Iap(s, z) = 210‘cl’,,.
This last expression is similar to the way of
suppressing multiples and calculating reflection
coefficients given by Goupillaud il’X1). The ad-
\-antage of equation (3) over equation (1) is that
in equation (3) we use the entire spectrum of u
and ct and do not need to consider picking the
onset time ;\ slight disadvantage of equation (3)
is that it assumes a minimum phase downgoing
 Reflector Mapping 469

lrave. Even if multiples are included, this as- performs the deghosting correctly for all offsets if
sumption is al\vays valid ior an impulsi!,e surface the do\vngoing wave D(s, z, w) inclutles the ghost.
source’ of scalar \vaves in a layered medium. It will ;\s noted in paper 1, there is no extra computa-
usually be a reasonable assumption in the fielcl. tional effort in including a ghost in the calculation
(The principal feature of minimum phase is that 0i Dix, 2, w) ll!- difference equations. Caution is
the energy arrives in a burst which is not followed required in the frequency domain as uell as the
by a larger burst.) .I process similar to decori- time domain. Figure 2 show the nodal lines
solution is implicit in equation (3). In a sim- which \vill appear ii the ghost is as strong as the
plified \-ie\v of tlcconvolution, \re a5sumc that re- primary. Fortunately, the ghosting problem is
flection coefficients are randomI!- distributed with usually not severe in practice; and we shall sug-
depth, so that the upcoming \~a\-e is created by a gest an implementation of equation (3) \vhich ac-
convolution of some unkno\vn downgoing wave- counts ior noise and avoids division by small
form with random reflection coefficients. Be- quantities. Let the integrand Z7/11 of equation
cause of the randomness of the reflectors, \ve ma) (3) be multiplied and divided by the complex
equate a power spectral estimate of the observed conjugate of the do\vngoing Irave. Then, the de-
upcoming \va\-e to the energy density spectrum nominator is the spectral density DD* of the
of the initial do\\ngoing wave. \Ve then compute tlo\vngoing Jr-ave. A spectrum is real and contains
a minimum phase time function \rith the rc- no phase iniormation. Recalling earlier remarks
quit-cd spectrum anti call it cE(.v,2, I). Division b>- about automatic gain control, we find it natural
D(.r, e, w) in expression (3) amounts to something to omit the denominator and consider another
similar to the usual implementation of decon- map construction formula:
solution with d(s, 2, t).
time variable deconvolution is a process mo-
tivated by the kno\vletlge that as the downgoing
wave penetrates the earth, its higher frequencies
dissipate first because of the nonideal acoustic
properties of rocks. If D(.r, z, w) is computed h!- The phase of the integrand in equation (1) is the
difference approximations to the 1vaI.e equation, same as that of equation (3). The amplitude in
it iS not diffiCUlt 10 iJlCiU(lC the i~~~ChaJli51~~ Oi high equation (1) has the very tlcsirable property that
frcquenc?_ losses. \\.C could alto iJlclude loss it drops off rapidly in any region where either the
mechanisms in the tlo\vn\vartl extrapolation 0i I-. downgoing \\-al-e is weak or the upgoing wave is
;\n interesting aspect of this approach to time \vcak. Thus, equation (4) is good for superposition
variable deconvolution is that it is really space of maps of many spatially separated shots be-
variable filtering and may I)c empirically related cause each shot contributes most to the map in
to properties of earth materials. the region it best illuminates. .\ compromise
i\nother application of equation C.3) is to the het\veen equations (3) and (4) which can sho\v
operation called deghosting. .\ ghost arises \vhen some of the advantages of deconvolution with
wc are shooting \vith a rather deepI>- buried some of the signal-to-noise advantages of (1) is to
charge. -liter the \vave that travels directly from use an integrand like
the shot do\vn to the reflector arrives, a ghost
c.D*,‘(\- + DD*),
wave which has traveled from the shot to the
surface and then down to the reflector arrives. If where 1. is a constant or a slo~vly varying function
the ghost is not accounted for in the mapping of frequency and space. Some kind of optimiza-
process, a single reflecting layer \vill appear to be tion could clearly lead to an involved discussion.
two closely spaced layers. ‘1‘0 a first approxima- Equation (4) may easily be expressed in the
tion, .deghosting amounts merely to deconvolv- time domain as
ing the data with the appropriate double pulse.
More precisely, the time separation of the t\ro
Mnp(a, z) = J ZL(.Y, z, t)d(.r, 0, t)tlt. (5)
pulses is a function of shot-to-geophone offset.
If a dcghost filter for normal incidence is applied
too far off from normal incidence, ghosts will he The mapping formula (5) will be most accurate
generated rather than destroyed. Equation (3) when the downgoing wave is an impulse, but it is
470 Claerbout

1:Kk. 2. A diq~l;~y of downgoing monochromaticwaves emanatingfrom a buried sourceS analits surfaceimage 1

reflection Kodes occurwhere there is tlestructiveinterference.

clearly a reasonable approximation if (t(.r, 2, t) is
a wavelet of short duration.
PROJECTING WAVES DOWNWARD
To the first approximation, projecting the
downgoing wave downward is purely a theoretical
operation. All that is needed is the shot time and
position and a velocity model. The upcoming
wave, however, is what we observe on the surface.
If we project this wave back downward using a
linear scheme (scaling and shifting), the mapping
formulas of the previous section will all be linear
functions of the observations. This is important
because it means we can operate with confidence
at low signal-to-noise ratios.
There are at least three operationally different
schemes for projecting waves from the surface
back down into the earth. The first method, which
is perhaps the only method in currently popular
data processing programs, is ray theory. The
second is based on the diffraction integral and has
been used by Peterson (1969), Fontanel and Grau
(1969), and Trorey (1968, 1070). This second
method has been called “impulse holography” by
Fontanel and Grau. The third method is the
method of difference equations [Jroposedin paper
1. First let us review- ray methods and impulse
holography to see how they ma! be understood in
terms of the mapping formulas oi the last section.
Normal moveout correctiotl is the simplest
form of migration or reflector mapping. Let us see
how it may be regarded as an implementation of
the mapping formula (5). As sl~own in Figure 3,
the source is taken to be an impulse s(t) at the
coordinate origin (0, 0). The wave reflects from a
horizontal planar interface at die point (x,2). The
wave bouncing off from the refh,ctor is of the form
6(t-r/c), wherer= (.P+~‘)r~~i: the distance along
a ray from the shot to the interface and c is the
(constant) velocity of the material. The wave
arrives at the surface at the point (as, 0), where
it should be of the form 6(t--Zr c). In fact, if ob-
servations arc made at the point (2.r, 0), a compli-
cated function u(2.r, 0, t) is obxt~rvedthat is likely
 Reflector Mapping 471

to be only a crude approximation to the impulse. create a depth map. ;\long these lines, Hagetloorn
However, from ray theory \re might expect the 11054) presents a geometrical method for migra-
wave at the surface to be a delayed verhion of tion of time domain seismograms:.
the wave at the reflector; that is, u~L.v., 0, I) r\ll oi these ideas may be reexpressed in the
ZEu(.r, 2, l-~/c). In other words, the \va\‘e at frequency domain. In that domain, different ideas
depth is given in terms of the surface obs5rvation present different advantages or ditliculties in
by U(S, z, L)=u(~.v, 0, t+r c-j. Thus ior a single concept and coml~utation. Since the impulse ho-
shot, equation (5) becomes lography method and the tlitTerencc equation
method are expressed in the frequency domain,
it may be useful to the reader to see that normal
moveout correction may be clone in the frequenq
domain. .I single irequenc!- component 0i the
= 11(2X, 0, 27 C’)
imp&i\-e ~va\‘e emitted by the source is rcpre-
= ?1(2S, 0, 2(.? + 5’))’ ” c). hented by O(O, 0, w) =6(r) cxp( - iwf). The do\vn~
going \\-al-e at the refcctor is D(.v, 2, w)
Hence, the rctlector map is mule from all the
=exp-kLJif-Y c-)1,‘/,.
seismograms recorded at all .v-positions on t ht’
.is with the time domain situation, \ve espect
surface bv resealing the time axes in terms 0i thv
the wave at depth to bc derivable iron1 the sur-
two-way traveltime 011 the raypath to the depth
iacc observation by mran5 0i a time shift (ant1 a
2. In concept, \ve get a depth map \vith just 011~’
scale factor bccau~ 0i 1 r). \\.v ha\-t~
shot. In practice, more shots are used, allowing
illumination of a greater region 0i the subsuriacc, I-(X, 2, W) e\p (- i0l)
statistical averaging (common depth point stack-
= 2(.(2.v, 0, w) exp (-iwit + r c)).
ing), and estimation of the vclocitv function
(residual normal moveout). It is not difficult to Ignoring the scale iactor5, \vc wc’ that equation
generalize the procedure to a situation \vhere the (4) bxollle~
velocity function c(z) is a function 0i depth. \\.e
may trace rays to find the appropriate time a&
resealing function \Vhat ih more tlilficult is to
extend the process to a more general \.clocitJ.
function for example, the function correspontlin::

=S1’(2x,
0,w)
to iolded and dipping layers. The problem is that
the surface point (2.r, 0) will then not be associ- e\;p (- i2wr r)dw.
ated with a depth point (I., z). In this case, some
type oi scan or search procedure is required to
The result must be the same as the one lve had
in the time domain. 11.e could actually do normal
moveout corrections in the frequency domain b!
this method, but it \I-ould turn out to be mereI>
an awkward wal- of rcscaling the time axis oi the
seismograms.
Complicatetl reflector shapes may also be
mapped by frequency domain procedures. Ho-
lography illustrates an application 0i equation (4)
to the curved reflector situation. There are t~vo
tlasic approaches: (1) focusing the image point of
the source in the reflector and (2) Rayleigh-
Sommerfeld aplanatic mapping. The first of these
t\vo methods encounters difficulties with curved
reflectors, so \\-e \vill restrict attention to the
second. Refer to Figure 4. .I monochromatic
seismic wave source is located at S, a seismic wave
I,‘r c. 3. Ckometrj- for rc.llection from ;I planar interface
(normal moveout correction geomelr~-). receiver is located at K,,, anal the image field scan-
472 Claerbouf

SPLIT THE WAVE EQUATION INTO UPGOING

AND DOWNGOING PARTS

The difference equation method was developed

v
earlier in terms of perturbation theory. Subse-
quent efforts have put the method on a firmer
b %n base, a base which allows clearer exposition, ex-
tended region of validity, and gc,neralization to
other physical problems. As compared to ray
P methods and the diffraction integral, the differ-
ence equation method offers certain advantages.
I:lc. 4. Geometry for reflection or scattering from an
arbitrary depth point p at (.Y,a). I;rom Peterson (1969), The principal advantage is that die velocity func-
1’. 58. tion may be prescribed as a rather arbitrary func-
tion of space. Thus, computer inll)lcmentation is
ning point [the point at (s, z)] is denoted by p. not complicated when the geological situation is
‘I’hc field observed at K, is taken to be A,, complicated. This arbitrariness in the velocity
exp( - &). The Rayleigh-Sommerfeld aplanatic
model would be especially advantageous in off-
mapping equation as given by Peterson (1969),
shore prospecting, where the thpth is rapidly
(who specialized to 24 surface receivers to study
variable, or if the computing were to be done in
resolution with a finite spread length) is
an interactive environment, wlrcre a laterally
variable velocity model is devclol)cd iteratively.
Map(x,z,w)= 2 A,Lexp (-i&) The wave equation includes 110th upgoing and
n-1 (6) downgoing waves in its solution5. ‘I’0 implement
‘esp (--i(r,, + rPJw/‘c). the mapping formulas, we need not only the solu-
tion to the wave equation but also a means ol
We have ignored the so-called obliquity factor separating the solution into tlrc~ upgoing and
and an amplitude :vhich is- slow! v xvariable w i ! h downgoing components: iVirt!n I\ c Ue working
space. With the associations with analytic solutions in a constant velocity
medium, the separation is a trivial choice of
sign of a square root. For exarnllle, in hologra-
x=24
phy, extensive use is made oi the fact that
: : C A, esp (- i$,, - ir,,&c)
exp[-iiw(l-v/c)],‘r is a solutiorl to the scalar
wave equation. The distance Y= ~.P+z~)~~~ from
and the source (or focus) to the oljservation point
is given by a square root. Choice or the root sign
D(X, z, w) : : esp (+ ir,,w/f),
gives the wave direction. In nunlckrical work, the
we may compare equation (6) with the integrand separation is not so simple. For the following
of equation (4). Elimination of the plane layer practical reason, separation is essc,ntial: Consider
assumption is made possible by the creation of a pulse observed at the surface oi a homogeneous
U(X, z, w) from all the surface observations rather earth. Let the wave equation be USYL to determine
than just the observation at (2x, 0). This con- the waveforms seen at depth. :It any depth, we
struction of U(N, z, W) is firmly based in diffraction see two pulses, the upgoing wa\ c and later the
theory and may be intuitively regarded as a sum- downgoing wave. At greater dey)ths, the pulses
mation of Huygen’s secondary wavelets. Thus, are more widely separated. 7’11~. more widely
holographic principles enable us to migrate dif- separated the pulses are, the more’ lrequencies are
fractions from complicated reflector shapes in a required to represent the double i)ulse. The num-
medium of constant velocity. For a homogeneous ber of required frequencies quickly exceeds a
medium, the diffraction integral represents an practical limit. Hence, we will scl)arate the wave
important analytical solution to the difference equation into two parts, one for the upgoing
equations to be developed in the following section. waves and one for the downgoing waves. Where
As an analytic solution, it should be of further there are velocity gradients, one leave type scat-
value in shedding light on questions of resolving ters into the other. Thus, it will be sensible to
power of the difierence equation method. organize the computation so that Ilrimary arrivals
 Reflector Mapping 473

are calculated first anti multiply reflected waves Sotice that the velocity oi the material is given
are considered later if necessary. by
Among those who work Gth field data, no
c = (K/‘p)“‘.
apology need be made for using the acoustic wave
equation to describe elastic waves. Let U and II’
It is convenient to define the \vavenumber uz by
denote displacement in the s and z directions and
let P denote pressure. Let p denote density and K Wl = w ‘r.
denote incompressibility. Consider an exp(- iwt)
time dependence. Since the product of mass den- Ii we temporarily take ~2 to be intlepenclent of .x,
sity and acceleration equals the negative of the 171commutes \vith D,,; and we may use the b-
pressure gradient, we have nomial theorem to define the square root oh.

--w?p(. = _ d/’ ‘if,, (7a) ab = w[l + D,, (2111’) - ].

and
II m is space tlepcndent, the binomial expansicm
--w’p[l- = - a/’ i)s. (it,) is only an approximation, though quite a good one
(see Figures 5 to 7). \Ve will later see that the
Since pressure is proportional to compression, we
binomial expansion is a high frertuency or ray
have
approximation and that it may be improved to
accommodate lower frequencies. In terms of 0 and
0, equation (8) becomes
To proceed algebraically, it will be convenient
to take density independent of s. Snell’s law in-
volves velocity but not density. Density does
contribute to the magnitude of reflection coeth
cients but is never estimated (and perhaps can- \\‘e intend to diagonalize the matrix 0i equation
not be estimated) from reflection seismic field (I 0) by transformation to nc‘\v \rariables IT and D,
data. Despite this, we will retain the z dependence which we shall later see fit to call upgoing and
oi density; although we will ignore the .Y depen- downgoing waves. IXagonalization is accom-
dence. \Ve let D,, denote the second derivative plished through a transformation of column
with respect to .Y, eliminate I-, and arrange equa- eigenvectors,
tions (7b) and (7~) in the matrix form

[:;.I=[;bJ[p]> (11)
(d,‘dz) ;,
[I
and the inverse relation, a transform of ro\j
(8) eigenvectors,
0 w?p P

=[ - 1,/K-DD,,,‘(w’p) 0 I[IT’
1
It is convenient to define (12)
(1? = W”P (‘kt)

b’ = 1 ‘K + D,, ‘(w’~). (01)) The fact that this transformation is an cigen-

vector transformation has no particular impor-
The definition of 11from 11~involves taking the
tance in our development, but the recognition of
square root of an operator. It will he necessary to
this fact may he a great aid in solving other physi-
understand the meaning of quantities like (I, 11,
cal problems. \Ve may verify consistency by sub-
and ab. For the last, we have
stitution of equation (11) into equation (12).
a”b? = wzp,‘K + D,,. Then substitute equation (11) into equation (10)
to get
474 Claerbout

~‘IG. 5. \V;tves impinging on a Imrieti IAock of slogsvelocity material. \Vaves enter at the top of the I~lock and are
com~~letel~- internall~~ retlectetl from the sitle of the I~lock. This leaves a shadow on the out4de of the I~lock.

FIG. 6. A sloxvvelocit); l~lock is illuminated from the side. There is partial reflection from the side of the I~lock and
mterference hetwcen naves entering the I~lock through different faces.
476 Claerbout

(-_a*b*)li*aL>,;& = - o*b*L) (lj)

or

aD,/as = i(a*b*)‘!D
‘. (16)

ICquation (16) can be interpretctl as h&g half oi

Premultiply equation (13) by the right side matrix the wave equation. With the positive square root,
of equation (12). it gives only the waves going in t IIC +z direction.
In a homogeneous medium, the ecluation may be
iab 0 -
Fourier transformed with respect to .r to get
0 - iab. m/a2 = i(w2jc2 - l~,‘)p‘ ~D. J‘ I’Ic solution D
= exp[+ ;(z~~/c~-k:)“‘z] justifies the term down-

= Ka2b’
_a;2]
0
- f[12_I]aiJaz going wave.
be homogeneous,
its usual form
Temporarily taking
we can get the wave equation
by differentiating
the medium

equation (lo)
to
in

with respect to z.

Equation (14) is a two by two set of equations.

Before trying to solve the set! we notice that in a
homogeneous medium &jdz = abjaz = 0 and the
equations decouple. Let us consider just the down-
= (-nP - D,,)D.
going wave in this case. It is governed by the
equation (D;-J + D,, + m”)D = 0.

I:IG. 8. Expanding cylindrical wave. An analytical solution for a point source in the ix, x) l)l:~ne is taken at the
top boundary and projected doqnyard with a difference approximation Lo equation (17) Given (heapproximations
which went into equation (17), It 1ssomewhat surprising that the solution looks as good as it ~CIVSfor ravs between
45 degrees and the horizontal. The principal deviations from the correct true cylindrical WV&VP are phase fronts
which are not quite circular and the anomalously slow amplitude decay for rays traveling ahoot 60 degrees from
the vertical.
 Reflector Mapping 477

V’IC. 9. kVaves coming to a focus. The calculation includes the first relativisticapproximation, that is, the D,, .D,
term. This accounts for the much better result than those show] in Claerlwut (19iOa).

Ii the square root in equation (16) is approxi- in the present paper tar oif-axts waves (See
mated by the first two terms of the binomial ex- Figures 8 and 9.) Inclusion of the extra term
pansion, equation (16) becomes the ordinar> causes no significant increase in the amount of
Schroedinger equation (with seismic z correspond computation, since the term fits on the same
ing to time t in quantum mechanics). ;\s it stands, 6-point (3 points in s, 2 points in z) star. ;\ more
equation (16) is the relativistic Schroedinger thorough analysis of various approximations to
equation. (The positive square root prevents the square root for various grid spacings at con-
present changes in quantum potential from intlu- stant velocity is given in Claerbout (lOSOb). In
cncing past values of the probability function.) .\ that paper, the wave equations are anal>-zed from
very useful first approximation to the relativistic a filter theory point of view. An improved approx-
Schroedinger equation is obtained by replacing imation, when the velocity is the space variable,
the square root in equation (1.5) by the first two is found by observing that operating t\vice \vith
terms of the binomial expansion. Specifically, the operator
with this truncation, equation (15) may be nrit-
m + D,, ‘(2~2) - (D,m) ‘(2m?)D, (18)
ten
gi\w
9
PM- + D,, + error. (19)
The D,,D, term \vas not included in paper 1; its
inclusion accounts for the sonic\vhat I)cttcr results Thus relation (18) is the &sired square root of
478 Claerbout

relation (10) except for the error. ‘I’hc error terms
are of two types. Some are neglected, since they
contain D, and higher terms which are signifi-
cant only for waves farther from the z-axis. Other
terms are neglected, since they do not increase
with frequency as do the terms retained. WC have
not yet worked on examples where the added
accuracy of the last term in expression (18) ap-
pears to have made a notable difference.
‘The right hand matrix in equation (14) is the
matrix which causes scattering from upgoing
waves to downgoing waves and vice versa. Let us
introduce a simplifying definition for this matrix.
D(s, 2, w). Hence, wc can make 8 first approxi-
mai ion fIO to II by extrapolation Ilownward with
iabfiD,,/& = (-a”b” + s11)Do. (21)
1: may be projected downcvard from surface data
with a similar equation. On the other hand, we
may desire to construct LTfrom II and a velocity-
density model. In this case, we construct a first
approximation UO to U in the iollowing way:
below all the reflectors, ZTomay I)c taken to be
zero. Then knowing ZA, every\\ here, we may
extrapolate CT0upward with

p h-j (22)
= (--u”b” + Srw) I’,, + SyD,,.
Is,, s,,J At the fret surface, the upcominfi wave bounces
(20)
back down into the medium, starting off a second
= -;E; _~]d/az[yb J.
downgoing wave UI. Since pressure vanishes at
the surface WC have D, = Va. Actually, WCmight
If this scattering matrix S is small, there is a v?sh to take account of an UIIC\‘I’II surface or a
simple iterative procedure for solving the ximul- static correction at the surlacc. Ii the effective
taneous equation set (l-1). Below a surface source surface elevation is h(s) and near wrface velocity
in a medium of modest inhomogeneity, U(s, z, w) is C, an al)proximation \:alid near vertical inci-
may be expected to be small compared to dence for small /r is

I“IG. 10.b’aves in a medium whosevelnci(y increasesI)y a factor oi 3 from t(q) to l)otlom. .\K;Linthe apparent
result for ra~‘sfar from vertical is much I~ct~erthorncould IX e\-pecte~l.In fact, one can see r:r!s which appear to
I)otLom~outand Iqin a return to the xuriacc.Suchrays, alLhoughI)h~~sicall~ l)retlictetl,arc ctrmlllrtel>~
outsidethe
realm ol validity of the qq>roximations.
Reflector Mapping 479
480 Claerbout
 Reflector
Dl(x, 0, CO)exp (i/w/c)
- l!“(n-, 0, W) esp (-&W/C) = 0.
The author recently observed a situation in which
multiples could be distinguished from primaries
by the fact that the static correction applies once
for primaries and twice for multiples. A high-
frequency, lowpenetration sparker was being
used by the USGS for sedimentation studies in
Monterrey Bay, California. The bottom was quite
level but the sea swell was about 4 ft high, causing
the bottom to appear on raw data to have a 1 ft
undulation. Primary echoes from the subsurface
also had the characteristic 4 It undulation. Second
bottom multiples appeared as an 8 ft undulation
and were therefore clearly distinguishable from
primaries. Conversely, bottom side ethos should
have a lesser static correction.
Finally, we show how to speed the calculation
when waves of interest are traveling at angles
near the vertical. For angles near vertical, there
is little bandwidth in vertical wavenumber spec-
trum; vertical wavenumbers are all m=u/c or
have values slightly smaller. We may shift this
band toward zero wavenumber to enable use of a
much coarser grid in the z direction. The basic
idea was presented in paper 1; here we extend it
to velocities c(s, z), which may have a rather
severe depth dependence. Figure 10 illustrates a
situation where the velocity increases by a factor
of three over the depth interval shown. First, we
define i(z) as some kind of spatial average of
c(s, z) taken over all s. Next, we define a phase by
Consider the fact that if U(w, z, w) and D(.r, z, w)
are plane waves vertically propagating in a homo-
geneous medium, the integral of equation (14) is
given by
D esp (z$) 0 A
[I [
I’= 0 esp(--4) I[ 1 H ’
(23)
where A and B are complex constants. If the
medium is slightly inhomogeneous and waves are
not exactly plane waves traveling vertically, we
still suspect that A or B will vary much more
slowly with z than does D or U. To find a differen-
tial equation with A and H as solutions, we sub-
stitute equation (23) into equation (11), pre-
Mapping 481
multiply by the inverse matrix of (23), and re-
arrange. 1Vc get
Some examples of reflected waves and the use of
reflector mapping formulas are given in Figures
11 and 12.
CONCLUSION
A reflector mapping formula ha5 I)een presented
which promises to be effective in tile presence ot
an arbitrary velocity function c(s, z), dipping and
curved reflectors, diffractions, gllosts, effective
surface elevation variations, and perhaps multiple
reflections. Even when seismic reflection data
contain many of these complexitiw, the mapping
formula can be implemented without undue com-
plexity by means of difference eclliations.
ACKNOWLEDGMEN’I
This work was principally funtlr,tl by a match-
ing grant of the National Science Foundation to
Stanford University. I wish to thaiik the Chevron
Oil Field Research Company for the use of their
seismic section plotter.
REFERENCES
Claerhoul, J. I:., lYiOa, Coarse grit1 calculations of
waves in inhomogeneous media with application to
delineation of complicated seismic structure: Geo-
physics, v. 3.5, p. 4077418.
-~~- lY7Oh, Numerical holograph! , in Acoustical
holography, Vol. 3: edited hy A. 1:. Metherell, New
York) Plenum Press.
I“ontanel, A., and Grau, G., 1969, ~\trplication of im-
pulse seismic holography: Presented at the 39th
Annual International SEG Meeting, (‘algary.
Goupillaud, I’., 1961, An approach to inverse filtering of
near-surface layer effects from seisnric records: Geo-
physics, v. 26, p. 754-760.
Hagedoorn, J. G., 19.54, A process of seismic reflection
internrelation: geophys Prow.. v. 2. o. 85-127.
Peters&, R. A., 1969; Seismography I(j?O, the writing
of the earth waves: preprint for presentation at SEG
symposium, 1,os Angeles.
Ilichtmyer, I<. D., and Morton, K. W.. 1967, Difference
methods for initial value problems: New York, Inter-
science.
Trorey, A. W., 1068, personal communication.
- 190, A simple theory for seismic diffractions:
Geophysics, v. 35, p. 762-784.