| Abstract: | Minimization of seismic residuals does not guarantee uniqueness of the model, and this implies ambiguities in the inversion. Amplitude vs. offset (AVO) inversion does not lead to a unique solution of single elastic interface parameters unless converted and S-wave or critical angle reflections are available. Given the ambiguity of AVO inversion, this paper discusses the interaction between AVO and velocity estimation. The number of independent parameters necessary to describe an isolated reflection with AVO behaviour and residual velocity error is determined. Statistical analysis allows the establishment of an approximate equivalence of the effects of AVO and slight velocity variations; this equivalence cannot be solved without geological a priori information (kinematic equivalence). The data are then decomposed into compound events (i.e. sequences of N interfaces that follow each other at a fixed time lag). The decomposition is obtained by extrapolating the results of the analysis from narrowband to wideband data. Compound events decomposition demonstrates that AVO inversion is ambiguous, not only in the physical parameter space (P- and S-wave velocities, and density) but also kinematically. As an example of compound event decomposition, a medium is derived. This medium is geologically implausible but is kinematically equivalent. |
