Deep learning phase pickers: how well can existing models detect hydraulic-fracturing induced microseismicity from a borehole array?
Open Access
- 26 October 2024
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Geophysical Journal International
- Vol. 240 (1) , 535-549
Abstract
Deep learning (DL) phase picking models have proven effective in processing large volumes of seismic data, including successfully detecting earthquakes missed by other standard detection methods. Despite their success, the applicability of existing extensively-trained DL models to high-frequency borehole datasets is currently unclear. In this study, we compare four established models (GPD, U-GPD, PhaseNet and EQTransformer) trained on regional earthquakes recorded at surface stations (100 Hz) in terms of their picking performance on high-frequency borehole data (2000 Hz) from the Preston New Road (PNR) unconventional shale gas site, in the United Kingdom (UK). The PNR-1z dataset, which we use as a benchmark, consists of continuously recorded waveforms containing over 38,000 seismic events previously catalogued, ranging in magnitudes from -2.8 to 1.1. Remarkably, all four DL models can detect induced seismicity in high frequency borehole data and two might satisfy the monitoring requirements of some users without any modifications. In particular, PhaseNet and U-GPD demonstrate exceptional recall rates of 95% and 76.6%, respectively, and detect a substantial number of new events (over 15,800 and 8,300 events, respectively). PhaseNet’s success might be attributed to its exposure to more extensive and diverse instrument dataset during training, as well as its relatively small model size, which might mitigate overfitting to its training set. U-GPD outperforms PhaseNet during periods of high seismic rates due to its smaller window size (400-samples compared to PhaseNet’s 3000-sample window). These models start missing events below Mw -0.5, suggesting that the models could benefit from additional training with microseismic datasets. Nonetheless, PhaseNet may satisfy some users’ monitoring requirements without further modification, detecting over 52,000 events at PNR. This suggests that DL models can provide efficient solutions to the big data challenge of downhole monitoring of hydraulic-fracturing induced seismicity as well as improved risk mitigation strategies at unconventional exploration sites.Keywords
All Related Versions
Funding Information
- NERC (GA/13M/031)
- BGS (GA/20M/004)
- Natural Environment Research Council (NE/R017956/1)
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/Y020960/1)
This publication has 38 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Little Data Goes a Long Way: Automating Seismic Phase Arrival Picking at Nabro Volcano With Transfer LearningJournal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 2021
- Evidence for Latent Crustal Fluid Injection Transients in Southern California From Long‐Duration Earthquake SwarmsGeophysical Research Letters, 2021
- Hydraulic Fracturing‐Induced SeismicityReviews of Geophysics, 2020
- Introduction to Seismology2019
- A review of the current status of induced seismicity monitoring for hydraulic fracturing in unconventional tight oil and gas reservoirsFuel, 2019
- A seismological overview of the induced earthquakes in the Duvernay play near Fox Creek, AlbertaJournal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 2017
- Carbon capture and storage, geomechanics and induced seismic activityJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 2016
- Mapping the ice‐bed interface characteristics of Rutford Ice Stream, West Antarctica, using microseismicityJournal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 2015
- Two-year survey of earthquakes and injection/production wells in the Eagle Ford Shale, Texas, prior to the 20 October 2011 earthquakeEarth and Planetary Science Letters, 2013
- Probabilistic Earthquake Location in 3D and Layered Models2000