SPECIAL

S e i s mSECTION:
i c i n tSeeri ps rm ei tc a t
i n
i o
tne r p r e t a t i o n

*HRPHWULFDWWULEXWHVIRUVHLVPLFVWUDWLJUDSKLFLQWHUSUHWDWLRQ
TOMAS VAN HOEK, Shell Malaysia E&P
STEPHANE GESBERT and JIM PICKENS, Shell International E&P
Downloaded 05/01/13 to 80.254.147.196. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

T he application of sequence strati-

graphy to seismic interpretation
has proven to be fundamentally im-
portant in basin analysis. It provides
a framework for understanding strat-
igraphic evolution and is a key element
in predicting the spatial distribution
of reservoir, seal, and source rocks.
Traditional methods of seismic se-
quence stratigraphy make use of
observations such as stacking patterns,
seismic character of facies, and their
distribution to develop subsurface
models. We present a set of seismically
derived geometric attributes that
enhance and characterize these
observations, allowing a sequence strat-
igraphic framework to be developed in
Figure 1. Synthetic version of Vail’s seminal systems tract schematic used to illustrate the
the earliest stages of interpretation. geometric attributes and pseudo-Wheeler display. (After Vail, 1987.) Vertical axis = ms and
Classic seismic sequence stratig- horizontal axis = traces.
raphy starts with the subdivision of
seismic data into genetic reflection
packages, also referred to as seismic
sequences and systems tracts. This is
done by identifying discontinuities on
the basis of seismic reflection termi-
nations (onlap, downlap, truncation,
toplap, and apparent truncation). Sub-
sequent subdivision of the sequences
and systems tracts into seismic facies
units using seismic facies analysis (de-
scription and geological interpretation
of seismic reflection parameters such
as configuration, continuity, ampli-
tude, frequency, and interval velocity)
facilitates the interpretation of envi-
ronmental settings, depositional pro-
cesses, and lithology predictions (Vail,
1987). Observations and conclusions Figure 2. Enlargement of Figure 1 with a decimated dip field visualized on the section.
can be made at a range of scales (tem- Geometric information is contained within the dip field as illustrated by the divergent,
convergent, and parallel regions.
poral and spatial), but sequence strati-
graphic models are generally integrated at subregional and reflection configuration, (e.g., Mitchum et al., 1977) have
regional levels. been much harder to derive as seismic attributes. The criti-
Seismic attributes measuring seismic continuity, frequen- cal challenge has been the need to capture relevant seismic
cy, amplitude and interval velocity characteristics have been geometries at scales in the range of hundreds to thousands
in existence for decades, but these traditional derivatives do of seismic traces. This has left interpreters to employ manual
not address the large-scale building blocks common to se- techniques that, although valid, are labor intensive and re-
quence stratigraphy. Instead, they address seismic data on quire a great deal of manual interpretation before a sequence
local scales (single trace to 3–9 traces, making computation stratigraphic model can be developed.
fairly straightforward). Most early attempts to capture seismic reflector geometry
In contrast, the seismic geometries associated with se- as an attribute were limited in scope because of a strong focus
quence stratigraphy, consisting of both external form and on the local scale effects (i.e., Randen, 1998; Barnes, 2000).

1056 The Leading Edge September 2010

 S e i s m i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
Downloaded 05/01/13 to 80.254.147.196. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 3. The thinning attribute highlights reflection terminations
(i.e., onlap, downlap), thereby indirectly delineating reflection
packages in space and time. Both system tracts as well as system tract
elements can be interpreted. HST = highstand systems tract. TST =
transgressive systems tract. LST = lowstand systems tract.
Subsequent improvements in image processing techniques
(Bakker, 2003), computing power, and semiautomatic track-
ing techniques, resulted in a revival of the interest in seismic
geometric attributes and geometry analysis. In recent years,
this technology has advanced significantly with successful
demonstration of 2D and 3D techniques (Lomask, 2006;
Ligtenberg et al., 2006).
We present three moderate-to-large-scale seismic geomet-
ric attributes that blend classical sequence stratigraphy with
modern seismic attribute generation. To illustrate their ap-
plication, a synthetic version of Vail’s seminal systems tract
schematic is presented. This is followed by a case study from
the Campos Basin, Brazil, to illustrate the use of these attri-
butes in subregional analysis. A second paper in this special
section by Guerra and Poupon demonstrates exploration case
studies using the seismic geometric attributes.
Methodology
To illustrate the methodology underpinning these geometric
attributes and their application, we have created a simple syn-
thetic seismic section (1D convolution), using Vail’s systems
tract schematic as the basis for analysis (Figure 1).
A fundamental element of our approach is analysis of the
seismic dip field (Figure 2). There are several ways to charac-
terize the dip, the least ambiguous of which is to define the
Figure 4. The unconformity attribute. The attribute highlights
sequence boundaries, but also downlap surfaces and transgressive
surfaces. SB1 = type 1 sequence boundary. SB2 = type 2 sequence
boundary. Mfs = maximum flooding surface. TS = transgressive
surface.
normal vector field, which is everywhere perpendicular to seis-
mic reflections. We estimate the normal vector field in three
steps, following Weickert (1998):
1) Estimate the seismic amplitude gradient vector field g, us-
ing Gaussian derivative filters
2) Form the structure tensor field ggT and regularize it (e.g.,
by spatially smoothing its components)
3) Extract the principal eigenvector of the structure tensor,
which constitutes our estimate of the normal vector.
The generality and robustness of this approach, for the analy-
sis of orientation in images, is discussed in detail in Weickert.
The method readily extends to 3D data. The geometric at-
tributes described in the next section are calculated from the
dip field, which encodes the seismic geometrical information
(Figure 2).
Thinning attribute. The “thinning” attribute quantifies
the degree of seismic reflection convergence (or divergence)
of a seismic package over a moderate to large scale (typi-
cally 100–500 seismic traces; Figure 3). If the dip field can
be considered analogous to a fluid velocity vector field, this
convergence can be thought of as the relative change of flow
density across a user-specified scale. In contrast to attributes
that highlight local features such as channels or faults, the
thinning attribute enhances reflection packages defined by
September 2010 The Leading Edge 1057
 S e i s m i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

different external geometries (i.e., par-

allel versus thinning).
The latter, combined with their as-
sociated reflection terminations (i.e.,
onlap, downlap, toplap, etc.), aid the
Downloaded 05/01/13 to 80.254.147.196. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

interpreter in recognizing significant

stratigraphic packages, such as parase-
quences, sequences and groupings of
stratigraphic elements in general. In
turn, when combined with Wheeler
analysis (described below), these ob-
servations translate into systems tracts,
allowing the interpreter to analyze
the spatial and temporal evolution of
depositional systems (i.e., prograda-
tion versus aggradation rate).
Unconformity attribute. The “un-
conformity” attribute computes the
degree of conformability (or inversely
the unconformability) of seismic re-
flections over a large scale (typically
>1000 traces; Figure 4). Similar to the
thinning attribute, the unconformity
attribute is a measure of the density
of flow of the dip field (per unit area)
at any point. In contrast to the thin-
ning attribute, bounding surfaces (e.g.,
transgressive, onlap, and downlap sur-
faces as well as angular unconformities)
are highlighted rather than reflection
packages. If we assume that seismic
reflections follow geological timelines,
Figure 5. The facies attribute. (a) Seismic section with a spectrum of layer-cake to chaotic (realizing that there are exceptions,
seismic signatures. (b) The facies attribute; high values = chaotic, low values = parallel. Observe
how the attribute distinguishes chaotic and layer-cake seismic “facies”, and identifies semilayer- Bracco Gartner et al., 1999), the value
cake signatures corresponding to wavy or parallel but “broken-up” reflectors. Vertical axis = ms. of the unconformity attribute is a rela-
Horizontal axis = traces. tive proxy for the amount of geological
time per unit thickness. The higher the
value, the more geologic time is “com-
pressed” within a unit thickness. It is
considered a relative proxy because the
method makes several implicit assump-
tions, including: constant depositional
rates over geological time (in the ab-
sence of well data and absolute age con-
trol), no compaction with depth, and
the absence of depositional hiatuses.
The additional complexities associated
with time-to-depth conversions add to
this uncertainty.
Regardless of these caveats, the un-
conformity attribute reduces seismic
data to a set of key horizons, allowing
Figure 6. Pseudo-Wheeler diagram display colored with the thinning attribute. The display the interpreter to build a framework
clearly brings out packages with different stacking behavior and spatial position, thereby of regionally correlative markers. The
outlining systems tracts and subsystem tract elements. The key surfaces separate the system tracts. latter, combined with results of the
SB1 = type 1 sequence boundary. SB2 = type 2 sequence boundary. Mfs = maximum flooding
surface. Tbfs = top basin floor fan surface. Tsfs = top slope fan surface. TS = transgressive surface. thinning attribute and Wheeler analy-
Vertical axis = pseudo geological time. Horizontal axis = traces. sis, provide the basis for system tracts

1058 The Leading Edge September 2010

 S e i s m i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

delineation and sequence stratigraphic analysis at a range of

scales (first to higher order, depending on need).
Seismic facies attribute. The “seismic facies” attribute pro-
vides a measure of the degree of parallelism of seismic reflec-
tions, on a moderate scale (typically 10–50 traces; Figure 5).
Downloaded 05/01/13 to 80.254.147.196. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

In 2D seismic data, it maps data across a spectrum with two

Figure 7. Campos Basin case study setting. Fields used in this study,
Barracuda, Marlim, and Alabacora, are outlined.
end members: “layer cake” and “chaotic.” Within a sequence
stratigraphic framework, this attribute (unlike the thinning
and unconformity attributes) works on a subsystems-tract
scale and can be used to unravel depositional environments
within systems tracts, based on their seismic facies.
The computational basis for this seismic facies attribute
is a classic small-scale or local seismic attribute such as coher-
ency, which is then enhanced by building statistics at the local
attribute response along the dip field on a user-defined scale.
Pseudo-Wheeler display. Wheeler displays have been around
for more than half a century (Wheeler, 1958) and have recent-
ly received renewed attention (Ligtenberg et al.). They are an
ideal means to improve the understanding of spatial develop-
ment of depositional systems over geologic time. We refer to
these displays as “pseudo-Wheeler” displays because of the as-
sumptions already outlined in the unconformity section. The
Wheeler diagrams are created by automatic flattening on a
number of key surfaces, the location of which are identified,
for instance, on the thinning and un-
conformity attribute displays (Figure
6).

Case study from Campos Basin

Campos Basin, covering approximate-
ly 115,000 km2, contains up to 9 km,
of passive margin shallow- and deep-
water marine sediments (Guardado
Figure 8. Barracuda Field seismic expression. Reservoir has single-cycle expression with relatively
et al., 2000), providing an excellent
high negative amplitudes. Progradational deltaic packages, overlying reservoir interval, provide opportunity to demonstrate the geo-
top seal. Faults offset feeder systems. metric seismic attributes. The basin
developed during Neocomian rifting
associated with the opening of the
South Atlantic. The basin stratigraphy
can be subdivided into continental to
transitional synrift sediments (Ear-
ly Neocomian to Late Aptian) and
postrift marine siliciclastics and car-
bonates (Early Albian to present). For
this study, we have chosen to focus on
the transgressive (Late Albian to Early
Middle Eocene) and regressive (Late
Middle Eocene to Early Miocene) se-
quences, which contain the primary
reservoirs in discovered fields. Ap-
proximately 3.9 billion b/o have been
produced from these sands, with circa
8.5 billion b/o in reserve (Bruhn et al.,
2003).
Figure 9. Barracuda geometric attribute expression. Thinning attribute demonstrates thinning The Late Cretaceous to Tertiary
to left in red and thinning to right in purple. Unconformity attribute: dark grey to black = areas deepwater turbidite systems were de-
of relatively parallel layers; yellow = areas of convergence. Reservoir interval is highlighted by
dotted line in both images. posited as a series of linked slope-rise

1060 The Leading Edge September 2010

 S e i s m i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
Downloaded 05/01/13 to 80.254.147.196. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 10. The rms amplitude map (24 ms gate) shows toe-of-slope turbidite fans. Corendered thinning and unconformity attribute section
demonstrates: (1) delta progradation; (2) condensed section acting as top seal for toe-of-slope turbidite trap; and (3) toplap surface (zone). Section
approximately 40 km in length and up to 2.5 s (TWTT) high.

September 2010 The Leading Edge 1061

 S e i s m i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

tively). Trapping elements for these

fields involve a combination of lateral
and updip pinch out of leak facies (res-
ervoir) combined with fault offset of
feeder systems. The top seal consists of
Downloaded 05/01/13 to 80.254.147.196. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

condensed, distal deltaic clinoforms,

downlapping (built over) the underly-
ing reservoirs (Figure 8).
To demonstrate both field- and
regional-scale application of these
geometric attributes, three Campos
fields (Barracuda, Marlim, and Alba-
cora) were used for analysis. Barracuda
serves as an example of the turbidite
reservoirs making up this rich collec-
tion of fields. The field is characterized
by a NW-SE trending series of low-
sinuosity, channelized lobes that grade
into unconfined amalgamated fans.
In dip section, however, the seismic
expression of the field is subtle, with
the multiflow stack of sand-rich lobes
observed largely as single-seismic-cycle
reservoirs (Figure 8). Relatively high
negative amplitudes associated with
the hydrocarbon-saturated turbidite
Figure 11. Thinning attribute shown on three sections across central portion of the Campos sands do highlight the field on the
Basin (approximately in line with the Barracuda, Marlim, and Albalcora fields). Thinning to seismic section, although hydrocarbon
NW in red and thinning to SE in purple. Contour lines shown for structure (warm colors are versus lithological effects are difficult
higher elevation). Sections approximately 3.75 s TWTT.
to distinguish without the presence of
a clearly seismically imaged oil-water
contact. As mentioned above, the field
is overlain by a top seal of deltaic clino-
forms, downlapping onto the reservoir.
Application of the thinning and
unconformity attributes (Figure 9) on
the Barracuda data provides a great
benefit to the interpreter, by trans-
lating the seismic data into distinct
stratigraphic packages. Both attributes
clearly define the base and tops of each
parasequence within the prograda-
tional stack of clinoforms (overlying
the reservoir). The thinning attribute,
in particular, highlights the condensed,
downlap section of clinoforms where
the turbidites were deposited in areas
Figure 12. Campos regional comparison of Wheeler diagrams across three fields (with seismic of reduced local dip and increased ac-
infill). (1) Local accommodation due to salt mobility (reservoir level). (2) Distal toe-sets
(condensed intervals) of deltaic clinoforms. (3) Major progradational stack of parasequences. (4) commodation (Figure 10).
Sequence boundary with transgressive onlap. (5) Progradational stacking of parasequences. Local Convolving the two attributes with
variations in slumping and accommodation observed from one section to the next. Vertical scale an automated Wheeler diagram helps
(geological time) spans late Cretaceous to present. Each Wheeler section is approximately 40 km build on these stratigraphic observa-
wide. tions, by placing them in the context
channel and fan perched complexes (Figure 7). Reserves are of systems tracts. With this toolkit, the seismic data can be
distributed among 37 fields, but turbidites of the greater viewed in Wheeler space at different scales, from individual
Marlim Complex and Roncador Field hold the majority of reflectors, to parasequences, parasequence sets, and sequenc-
these volumes (5.2 billion b/o and 2.3 billion b/o, respec- es. On Barracuda, the Wheeler diagram (Figure 12, left panel)

1062 The Leading Edge September 2010

 S e i s m i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
Downloaded 05/01/13 to 80.254.147.196. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 13. Example of seismic facies attribute using Albacora data.
(top) Strike seismic section with rms amplitude extraction at reservoir
interval. (bottom) Seismic facies attribute of same seismic line. Warm
colors (chaotic seismic facies) highlight channel systems in cross section.
illustrates lateral variability in accommodation at the base of
section, associated with local loading as distal sedimentation
built out over the Late Aptian salt (phase 1, Figure 12). A ma-
jor period of progradation follows (phases 2 and 3 in Figure
12), transitional to aggradation and/or retrogradation, before
the highstand is truncated by a sequence boundary and a re-
newed phase of progradation (phases 4 and 5 in Figure 12).
The power of combining geometric attributes with
Wheeler analysis extends to regional correlation. The Marlim
and Alabacora fields provide a northward extension of the
trends observed in the Barracuda example (Figure 11). Again,
the process is to use the attributes to outline stratigraphic
packages and their stacking patterns. In the area transected by
the three sections, the degree of faulting (extension) and local
ponding varies across the basin, but the fundamental stacking
patterns are consistent from one field to the next (Figure 12).
Using these observations, regionally correlative surfaces can
be delineated and the associated systems tracts can be mapped
across the basin.
1064 The Leading Edge September 2010
If application of the thinning and unconformity attri-
butes can be thought of as establishing a regional to subre-
gional stratigraphic framework, utilization of the seismic
facies attribute populates it. Using Albacora Field as an ex-
ample, the facies attribute highlights channel bodies/systems
in cross section (Figure 13). By generating the attribute at
different scales and along multiple lines, seismic data can be
scanned to highlight areas for detailed seismic stratigraphic
analysis, hence leading to a more comprehensive modeling of
depositional environments.
Collectively, the application of these attributes, and the
associated interpretive process, provides the underpinnings
of sequence stratigraphic analysis at a variety of scales. The
process is quick and fairly automated, and can provide in-
terpreters with an appreciation of stratigraphic architecture
long before conventional horizon mapping is complete or
even started.
Conclusions and discussion
We have presented three moderate- to large-scale geomet-
ric attributes, which, together with the pseudo-Wheeler
displays, can serve as a valuable aid for seismic stratigraphic
analysis (in general), and sequence stratigraphy in particular.
The main strengths of these attributes (combined with the
Wheeler display) are:
1) Recognition of subtle seismic geometries or geometric pat-
terns which may have been overlooked with more tradi-
tional methods
2) Regional-scale geometry scanning of multiple seismic lines
in a short period of time to outline stratigraphic packages
and their stacking patterns
3) Stimulation of thinking about the geologic meaning of
seismic geometries by explicitly visualizing and capturing
them as geometric attributes
All of the above are critical for a thorough understanding of
basin development and the spatial distribution of reservoir,
seal, and source rocks.
It might be argued that the sequence stratigraphic ele-
ments described in the Campos example can be readily ob-
served without the use of geometric attributes. In plays with
more challenging data, however, the utility of this toolkit
greatly enhances subtle features that may be overlooked with
more traditional methods. Furthermore, the methodology
itself broadens the interpretation process to one of early ap-
preciation of stratigraphic elements rather than one of simply
tracking reflections. It is this early insight, and the conversa-
tions it generates, that are considered the greatest benefit of
the toolkit. In this context, it is best to think of these geo-
metric attributes, along with the Wheeler displays, as provid-
ing leverage for the interpreter rather than as a substitute for
geologic analysis.
We have demonstrated the value of the attributes on a
case study from the Campos Basin in Brazil, thereby showing
the robustness of this approach in application to nonsynthet-
ic data. Additional case studies are presented in the compan-
 S e i s m i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

ion paper in this special section by Guerra and Poupon.

References
Bahorich, M. S., and S. L. Farmer, 1995, 3D seismic coherency for
faults and stratigraphic features: The Leading Edge, 14, 1053–
1058.
Downloaded 05/01/13 to 80.254.147.196. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Bakker, P., 2003, Image structure analysis for seismic interpretation:

Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universiteit Delft.
Barnes, A. E., 2000, Attributes for automating seismic facies analysis:
70th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts,
553–556.
Bracco Gartner, G. L. and W. Schlager, 1999, Discriminating between
onlap and lithologic interfingering in seismic models of outcrops:
AAPG Bulletin, 83, no. 6, 952–971.
Bruhn, C. H. L., 2003, Campos Basin: Reservoir characterization and
management—historical overview and future challenges: OTC
Proceedings, paper 15220.
Guardado, L. R., A. R. Spadini, J. S. L. Brandao, and M. R. Mello,
2000, Petroleum systems of the Campos Basin, in M. R. Mello and
B. J. Katz, eds., Petroleum systems of the South Atlantic margins:
AAPG Memoir, 73, 317–324.
Ligtenberg, H. J., G. de Bruin, N. Hemstra, and C. Geel, 2006, Se-
quence-stratigraphic interpretation in the Wheeler transformed
(flattened) seismic domain: 68th Annual Conference and Exhibi-
tion, EAGE, Extended Abstracts, F002.
Lomask, J., 2006, Seismic volumetric flattening and segmentation:
Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University.
Mitchum, R. M., P. R. Vail, and J. B. Sangree, 1977, Seismic stratigra-
phy and global changes of sea level: Part 6: Stratigraphic interpre-
tation of seismic reflection patterns in depositional sequences, in
C. E. Payton, ed., Seismic stratigraphy and applications to hydro-
carbon exploration: AAPG Memoir 26, 117–133.
Randen, T., B. Reymond, H. I. Sjulstad, and L. Sonneland, 1998,
New seismic attributes for automated stratigraphic facies boundary
detection: 68th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded
Abstracts, 628–631.
Taner, M. T. and R. E. Sheriff, 1977, Application of amplitude, fre-
quency and other attributes to stratigraphic and hydrocarbon
determination: Section 2. Application of seismic reflection con-
figuration to stratigraphic interpretation, in C. Payter, ed. Seismic
stratigraphy: Applications to hydrocarbon exploration: AAPG
Memoir 26, 301–327.
Vail, P. R., 1987, Seismic stratigraphy interpretation using sequence
stratigraphy: Part 1: Seismic stratigraphy interpretation procedure,
1–10, Atlas of seismic stratigraphy: AAPG Studies in Geology no.
27.
Weickert, J., 1998, Anisotropic diffusion in image processing: B. G.
Teubner.
Wheeler, H. E., 1958, Time-stratigraphy: AAPG Bulletin, 42, no. 5,
1047–1063.

Acknowledgment: We thank Fugro MCS for the permission to use

the Campos seismic data shown in Figures 8–13, and Shell Inter-
national Exploration and Production for permission to publish this
article.

Corresponding author: tomas.vanhoek@shell.com

September 2010 The Leading Edge 1065