Wavepath migration versus Kirchhoff migration: 3-D prestack examples

Hongchuan Sun*, Gerard T. Schuster

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

21 Scopus citations


As a less costly alternative to Kirchhoff migration (KM), wavepath migration (WM) was primarily developed for reducing computational costs. In addition, far-field mi- gration artifacts can be suppressed because of the anti- aliasing feature inherent in the WM method. Our results with 3-D prestack synthetic data show that WM generates fewer migration artifacts and can sometimes define com- plex structure better than KM. Results with 3-D prestack field data show that WM can reduce migration artifacts and can sometimes resolve the reflection interfaces better than KM. The CPU comparison shows that, for our syn- thetic and field data examples, 3-D WM can be more than an order-of-magnitude faster than 3-D KM. The drawback with WM is that it is sometimes sensitive to the recording geometry and signal-to-noise ratio for an accurate calcu- lation of the incidence angles.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)977-980
Number of pages4
JournalSEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 2000
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2000 Society of Exploration Geophysicists.

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology
  • Geophysics


Dive into the research topics of 'Wavepath migration versus Kirchhoff migration: 3-D prestack examples'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this