Seismic Multi-Parameter Full-Waveform Inversion Based on Rock Physical Constraints

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors

Seismic Multi-parameter Full Waveform Inversion Based on 2 Rock-physical Constraints. By Cen Cao, Shanggao Li, Deshan Feng, Jia Tang, Zhizheng Tang, and Xun Wang

Introduction:

 

• When applying seismic multi-parameter full waveform inversion (FWI) using kinematic and dynamic information to reconstruct underground models, an ill-posed problem arises. To address this problem, the authors use prior information to improve the inversion problem. Using the layered model, they show that the inversion strategy based on rock-physical constraints can enhance the stability of inversion and obtain high-precision inversion results.

 

• Observations and comments:

 

The proposal's presentation is consistent and well-structured.  The analysis, based on the reliable Gardner equation, centers on the relationship between P-wave velocity and rock density.

 

The text, however, is unclear and contains typographical errors:

1. Figures 3c and 3d are blank.

 

- Line 395 mentions experiment 4.2.1, but it's missing from the text.

 

- Line 436 mentions 4.1.2, 4.1.2, and 4.1.3, which are also absent. Typo?

 

- Figures 3, 4, 5, 8, 11, and 14 need a more thorough analysis to clearly show the differences between the constricted and unconstricted cases.  Don't leave it up to the reader to guess the differences based on color alone.

 

- Figures 6 and 9 require a closer examination of the curves against the actual model.  The authors don't offer an interpretation of the results, leaving it to the reader. For instance, they don't specify which layer shows the proposed model's superiority.

 

Validity: According to the statistical parameters indicated, the results show an appropriate degree of validity.

 

• Originality and significance: The proposal's originality lies in its use of rock-physical constraints as prior information to address the ill-posed problem.

 

• Data & methodology: The authors apply an analytical model, whose results show good correlation with the experimental data, showing a high degree of validity.

 

• Appropriate use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties: A good degree of confidence is observed in the results

 

Conclusions: This paper proposes an innovative solution to the ill-posed problem; however, a more thorough analysis of the findings is necessary.

 

• Clarity and context: The text is clear in its development however; a more thorough analysis of the findings is necessary.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review of the manuscript titled “Seismic Multi-parameter Full Waveform Inversion Based on Rock-physical Constraints”, submitted to the Journal “Applied Science”.
- The title is somewhat consistent with the content of the manuscript.
- There is confusion about FWI in lines 12 and 14.
- Line 14: Can you explain how “FWI is a highly ill-posed problem” in a short sentence?
- Line 21: What is “1994BP model”?.
- What is the meaning of the abbreviations of formations in Table 1?
- Each of the colored circular regions in Figure 2(a) should be explained in the caption. 
- The models in Figure 3 need to be interpreted and discussed.
- A remark on the citation form: example [1-4] instead of [1]-[4].
- Please provide a clear presentation of the study area.
- What is the source of the data used in this study? 
- The seismic data used (velocity…) should be presented in detail. How are these data acquired? From where? What geophysical instruments are used? and so on.
- It would be more reliable if you include some photos showing the equipment and lab material used in this study during the drilling data and laboratory experiments.
- The high similarity between the Figure 4(a) and 4(b), and that between Figure 4(c) and 4(d) must be explained and justified in a short paragraph.
- The models in Figures 5 and 8 should be clear and of high quality.
- Line 298: Is “real model” or “True model”? If so, please use the same expression in the text and graphs (Figures 6 and 9). 
- In the legend of Figure 7, make the values in order 0, 500, 1000. 
- Make the colors chosen in the legend of Figure 10 for Unconstrained and True data clear. 
- Increase the size of the font labels of Figure 15.
Ultimately, you should highlight the strengths and main limitations of your work.
- Please revise your text of your manuscript and correct the grammatical and misspelling errors.
- The authors must provide a suitable version of their manuscript before submitting it for another round of review.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors

Seismic Multi-parameter Full Waveform Inversion Based on 2 Rock-physical Constraints. By Cen Cao, Shanggao Li, Deshan Feng, Jia Tang, Zhizheng Tang, and Xun Wang

• Observations and comments:

The proposal's presentation maintains its consistency and structure.

The authors significantly improved the writing of the text by correcting typographical errors.

In addition, they clearly improved the analyses for each figure, as requested.

The revised version significantly strengthens and clarifies the coherence in its development.

Validity: According to the statistical parameters indicated, the results show an appropriate degree of validity.

• Originality and significance: The revised article strengthens the proposal's originality, which lies in its use of rock-physical constraints as prior information to address the ill-posed problem.

 Data & methodology: The results show good correlation with the experimental data, showing a high degree of validity.

 Appropriate use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties: A good degree of confidence is observed in the results

Conclusions: This paper proposes an innovative solution to the ill-posed problem and strengthens the analysis of the results.