the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Multi-dimensional, Multi-Constraint Seismic Inversion of Acoustic Impedance Using Fuzzy Clustering Concepts
Abstract. Seismic inversion is a fundamental procedure that converts seismic data into useful information about underlying rock and fluid characteristics. However, because seismic data are band-limited, the inversion process is intrinsically difficult, resulting in non-unique solutions. To overcome these issues, several constraints are used to enforce properties such as smoothness and sparsity on the inversion results. We propose a technique that includes the clustering properties of previous information, such as well logs and geological data, into the inversion process. This grouping helps to preserve geological continuity and improves the resolution of the inversion data. By incorporating this strategy into our inversion framework, we can better describe the subsurface and deliver more consistent findings. Our technique was evaluated on both synthetic and actual seismic data, confirming its ability to generate accurate acoustic impedance models. Furthermore, the approach generated deconvolved and denoised versions of the seismic data, which are useful for future interpretation. The membership sections generated by the inversion method also demonstrated considerable promise for tracing geological horizons, discriminating between distinct sequences and layers, and even predicting likely layer contents. In conclusion, this work proposes an upgraded seismic inversion approach that utilizes the ability of clustering to incorporate earlier geological knowledge, resulting in more accurate and interpretable findings.
- Preprint
(2065 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1391', Paul de Groot, 27 May 2026
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Saber Jahanjooy, 03 Jun 2026
Dear Paul
Thank you very much for your positive and encouraging comments on our manuscript.
W e are grateful for your remarks regarding the membership sections. As you noted, we believe they have significant potential for geological interpretation and rock-property analysis.
We also appreciate your constructive comment regarding the inclusion of "other petrophysical data" in Algorithm 1. We agree that density and sonic logs are sufficient to derive acoustic impedance, which is the primary property inverted in this study. Our intention was to highlight the flexibility of the proposed framework, where additional information such as porosity, lithology, saturation, core measurements, or interpreted facies can be incorporated into the clustering process when available. These data are not required for the inversion itself, but they may provide additional constraints for defining cluster centers and memberships.
To avoid confusion, we have revised the manuscript and clarified that these additional petrophysical data are optional and are only used as supplementary information for the clustering component of the workflow.
We also thank you for carefully identifying the typographical errors and inconsistencies in the references. All of the corrections noted in the annotated PDF have been addressed in the revised manuscript. The revisions will be applied as soon as we receive the revisions of the other reviewers.
We sincerely appreciate your careful review, valuable suggestions, and recommendation for publication.
Best regards,
The Authors
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1391-AC1 -
CC2: 'Reply on AC1', Paul de Groot, 03 Jun 2026
Thank you Jahanjooy for addressing my comments. I agree with your reply concerning the flexibility of the proposed method and that adding additional variables could impact the clustering and therefore might influence the inversion result. I trust you also see the danger of this approach, especially since acoustic impedance is only related to sonic and density.Â
Best regards,
Paul.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1391-CC2
-
CC2: 'Reply on AC1', Paul de Groot, 03 Jun 2026
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Saber Jahanjooy, 03 Jun 2026
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1391', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Jun 2026
Dear Editor,
Thank you for inviting me to review this manuscript. The paper presents a multi-objective post-stack acoustic impedance inversion method that combines data misfit, model perturbation, sparsity, smoothness, and fuzzy clustering constraints. The topic is relevant to seismic inversion and reservoir characterization, and the attempt to use clustering-derived membership sections as interpretation products is potentially useful.
In my opinion, the manuscript contains an interesting idea and may be suitable for publication after substantial revision. However, the current version still has several important weaknesses. The novelty relative to existing fuzzy-clustering and sparse seismic inversion studies should be clarified, the mathematical formulation should be checked carefully, and the numerical validation should be strengthened using a more geologically complex benchmark model. The present synthetic model is relatively simple, which limits the strength of the conclusions regarding robustness, resolution improvement, and reduced dependence on the initial model or wavelet.
Therefore, I recommend Major Revision. The authors should revise the theoretical formulation, clarify the contribution of the method, provide more transparent parameter-selection criteria, test the method on a more complex benchmark such as the Marmousi or Marmousi2 model.
Sincerely,
Sen
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Saber Jahanjooy, 12 Jun 2026
Dear Reviewer,
We express our sincere appreciation for the thorough and constructive review provided by Reviewer 1, which has had a highly valuable impact on enhancing the quality of our manuscript. In response, we have prepared a detailed, point-by-point response file addressing all comments, which is attached here. At this time, we are waiting for the second reviewer's comments to be submitted. Because the portal restricts the upload of a revised manuscript until all reviewer evaluations are complete, the system is currently inactive for file updates. We look forward to uploading the updated version of our manuscript as soon as the second review is finalized and the system becomes fully active for formal resubmission.
Meanwhile, I have emailed the tracked version of the edited manuscript to the editorial support team.Sincerely,
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Saber Jahanjooy, 12 Jun 2026
The attached is application of the proposed seismic inversion on the Marmousi section.
-
RC4: 'Reply on AC3', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Jun 2026
The authors have carefully addressed my previous comments and made substantial efforts to improve the manuscript. The revised version is clearer, better organized, and more balanced in its discussion of the proposed method and its limitations. I appreciate the authors’ work and their constructive responses during the review process. In my opinion, the manuscript is now suitable for publication, and I recommend acceptance.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1391-RC4 -
AC5: 'Reply on RC4', Saber Jahanjooy, 26 Jun 2026
We sincerely thank the reviewer for the careful evaluation and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate the time and effort devoted to helping us improve this work.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1391-AC5
-
AC5: 'Reply on RC4', Saber Jahanjooy, 26 Jun 2026
-
RC4: 'Reply on AC3', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Jun 2026
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Saber Jahanjooy, 12 Jun 2026
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1391', Lutfi Mulyadi, 25 Jun 2026
Dear Editor,
Thank your so much for inviting me to be one of the review. I would love to congratulate to the authors for their inventions.Its very interesting to get the acoustic impedance based on the fuzzy clustering concepts. Based on my personal experience, geophysicists are interested to relate acoustics impedance with porosity and permeability for payzones. I would be more than happy if we can proceed this transformation directly from the obtained AI of this clustering method. Your willingness to proceeds further is really appreciated.
Best regards,
Â
Lutfi Mulyadi Surachman
Â
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1391-RC2 -
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Saber Jahanjooy, 26 Jun 2026
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for your encouraging comments and valuable suggestion.
We agree that the acoustic impedance obtained from seismic inversion provides a valuable basis for estimating petrophysical properties. The primary objective of this study, however, is to introduce and validate the proposed fuzzy clustering-based seismic inversion method.
Beyond improving the quality of the inverted acoustic impedance models, the fuzzy clustering results also provide valuable information that can enhance the interpretation of seismic data and acoustic impedance models. We have recently demonstrated this capability in a published case study (https://doi.org/10.22059/JESPHYS.2024.363747.1007551), which further supports the practical applicability of the proposed method.
We appreciate your insightful suggestion and will pursue this direction in our future research.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1391-AC4
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Saber Jahanjooy, 26 Jun 2026
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1391', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Jun 2026
Dear Editor,
The authors have carefully addressed my previous comments and made substantial efforts to improve the manuscript. The revised version is clearer, better organized, and more balanced in its discussion of the proposed method and its limitations. I appreciate the authors’ work and their constructive responses during the review process. In my opinion, the manuscript is now suitable for publication, and I recommend acceptance.
Sincerely,
Sen
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1391-RC3 -
AC6: 'Reply on RC3', Saber Jahanjooy, 26 Jun 2026
We sincerely thank the reviewer for the careful evaluation and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate the time and effort devoted to helping us improve this work.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1391-AC6
-
AC6: 'Reply on RC3', Saber Jahanjooy, 26 Jun 2026
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 170 | 40 | 8 | 218 | 31 | 33 |
- HTML: 170
- PDF: 40
- XML: 8
- Total: 218
- BibTeX: 31
- EndNote: 33
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
I would like to congratulate the authors on writing a very interesting paper. Their overview of inversion methods is comprehensive and well written. The Fuzzy clustering approach introduced in this paper has merit as demonstrated in their applications to synthetic and real seismic data. I especially like the displays of membership sections, which I have not seen before in seismic inversion publications. This novelty seems to have potential for qualitative and quantitative interpretation of geologic features and rock property predictions. I have only one comment: In the table on line 270, the authors give three possible inputs: seismic data, well data and other petrophysical data. Sonic and Density fall under well data. Since Acoustic Impedance is Density divided by Sonic, this is all you need. The authors should explain which "Other petrophysical data" adds value to the inversion process. Alternatively, I suggest removing the "Other petrophysical data" from the table and from the text.
I noted a few typos (spaces, mistakenly saying fuzzy instead of clustering) and inconsistencies in the reference list. I've uploaded a pdf with my comments.
I enjoyed reading this work and recommend it for publication with minor edits.
Best regards,
Dr. Paul de Groot, dGB Earth SciencesÂ