334 The Leading Edge March 2013
B e s t p a p e r s
Every year, SEG honors the 30 best papers presented at the
Annual Meeting. These papers are chosen from among the hundreds of
e-Poster, oral, and poster presentations given each year.
Approximately 900 presentations were given at the 2012 SEG Annual
Meeting held in Las Vegas last November.
The process for selecting the best paper relies on
participa-tion and input from the chair, cochair, and audience
mem-bers from each presentation. They view the presentation, then
evaluate it using a judging form designed for that specific type of
presentation. These forms ask the judges to rate the de-livery,
material, and to provide an overall rating for the pre-sentation.
At the end of a presentation, the chair collects the judging forms
and gives them to the Technical Program Co-ordinator. The
information on the forms is then entered into a spreadsheet and the
scores are tabulated to identify the top 30 presentations using a
numerical ranking method. The top 30 presentation winners receive a
letter from the SEG Presi-dent notifying them that their
presentation was chosen. They are also provided with a list of
groups, such as student chap-ters, that might be interested in
viewing their presentations and are invited to give their
presentation to those groups.
While the process of choosing the Best Papers is eas-ily
quantifiable, what goes into making a Best Paper
Best papers selected from the 2012 SEG Annual MeetingSPRING
HARRIS, SEG Assistant Editor
presentation is not. According to David Monk, current SEG
President and former Technical Program Chair of the 2005 Annual
Meeting, a good presentation has the ability to con-vey information
of a complex nature rapidly, and there must be something in the
presentation that is new. If Im in the audience I want to learn
something, and leave the presenta-tion thinking that was
interesting, Id never thought of that. He goes on to state that a
good presentation also stimulates questions and makes him want to
go back and read the ab-stract fully.
As for the importance of the SEG technical program, Monk wrote
that the presentations are important becasue they are an avenue for
the exchange of ideas and informa-tion between interested parties.
They advance the science! Advancing the science of geophysics is a
core goal of SEG and one of the reasons SEG expanded the Technical
Program to include e-poster presentations as well as the more
traditional oral and poster presentations.
Each year SEG is proud to host a technical program that is in
keeping with our mission of advancing geophysics to-day and
inspiring geoscientists for tomorrow. The top 30 presentations for
the 2012 SEG Annual Meeting are listed in the following table.
Title Author and affiliation
3D beamlet migration in VTI medium Jian Mao* and Ru-Shan Wu,
University of California at Santa Cruz; Biaolong Hua and Paul
Williamson, TOTAL E&P, Houston
A broadband full-azimuth land seismic case study from Saudi
Arabia using a 100,000 channel recording system at 6 terabytes per
day: Ac-quisition and processing lessons learned
Peter I. Pecholcs*, Riyadh Al-Saad, and Muneer Al-Sannaa, Saudi
Ar-amco; John Quigley, Claudio Bagaini, Alexander Zarkhidze, Roger
May, Mohamed Guellili, Sokol Sinanaj, and Mohamed Membrouk,
WesternGeco
A comparison of 5D reconstruction methods Aaron Stanton*, Nadia
Kreimer, David Bonar, Mostafa Naghizadeh, and Mauricio Sacchi,
Department of Physics, University of Alberta
AVO theory for large contrast elastic and anelastic targets in
precritical regimes
K. A. Innanen, Department of Geoscience, University of
Calgary
Compensating for source and receiver ghost effects in reverse
time migration
Yu Zhang, Graham Roberts, and Adel Khalil, CGGVeritas
Complete ensemble empirical mode decomposition for seismic
time-frequency analysis
Jiajun Han* and Mirko van der Baan, University of Alberta
Direct measurement of water velocity and tidal variations in
marine seismic acquisition
Kanglin Wang* and Paul Hatchell, Shell International E&P
Inc.; Carsten Udengaard and Ken Craft, FairfieldNodal; Shaun Dunn,
Sonardyne International Ltd.
Effective seismic interference elimination enabled by
multicomponent data from marine acquisitions
Massimiliano Vassallo*, Kurt Eggenberger, Dirk-Jan van Manen,
Susanne Rentsch, Wouter Brouwer, WesternGeco; Ali zbek,
Schlumberger
Exact and approximate solid substitution transforms Nishank
Saxena*, Gary Mavko, and Tapan Mukerji, Stanford Univer-sity
Feasibility of inverting compaction-induced traveltime shifts
for reser-voir pressure
Steven Smith* and Ilya Tsvankin, Center for Wave Phenomena,
Colo-rado School of Mines
Full elastic inversion of synthetic seismic data based on an
outcrop model (Book Cliffs)
A. Gisolf*, D. Tetyukhina, and S. M. Luthi, Delft University of
Technology, The Netherlands
Dow
nloa
ded
10/2
3/13
to 1
78.1
90.8
8.25
5. R
edist
ribut
ion
subje
ct to
SEG
licen
se or
copy
right;
see T
erms o
f Use
at htt
p://lib
rary.s
eg.or
g/
March 2013 The Leading Edge 335
B e s t p a p e r s
Full wavefield inversion of time-lapse data for improved imaging
and reservoir characterization
Partha Routh*, Gopal Palacharla, Ivan Chikichev and Spyros
Lazaratos, ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company, Houston
Improving reservoir geometry by integrating continuous wavelet
transform seismic attributes
Marcilio Castro de Matos, Sismo Research and Consulting and
AASPI/OU; Oswaldo Davogustto*, Carlos Cabarcas, and Kurt Marfurt,
The University of Oklahoma
Innovative QCs for more effective 4D processing Cyril Saint
Andre*, Benoit Blanco, Christian Hubans, and Benoit Pa-ternoster,
Total E&P
Integrated geophysical archaeological prospection resulting in
the dis-covery of the school of gladiators in the Roman town of
Carnuntum in Austria
Matthias Kucera*, Wolfgang Neubauer, Michael Doneus, Immo
Trinks, Erich Nau, and Geert Verhoeven, Ludwig Boltzmann Insti-tute
for Archaeological Prospection and Virtual Archaeology, Austria;
Sirri Seren, Archeo Prospections, Central Institute for Meteorology
and Geodynamics, Vienna, Austria; Alois Hinterleitner and Klaus
Lcker, Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Archaeological Prospection
and Vir-tual Archaeology, Austria and Archeo Prospections, Central
Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics, Vienna, Austria; Michael
Preges-bauer, Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Archaeological
Prospection and Virtual Archaeology, Austria; Timothy Saey,
Philippe De Smedt, and Marc Van Meirvenne, Department of Soil
Management, Ghent Uni-versity, Belgium
Interferometery with a dense 3D data set Fan-Chi Lin, Dunzhu Li,
and Robert W. Clayton*, Seismological Labora-tory, California
Institute of Technology; Dan Hollis, NodalSeismic LLC
Model reduction and interpolation methods in uncertainty
quantification
Paul G. Constantine, Stanford University
Numerical support of laboratory experiments: Attenuation and
veloc-ity estimations
Erik H. Saenger*, Claudio Madonna, Marcel Frehner, and Bjarne S.
G. Almqvist, ETH Zurich
On the prediction of repeatability noise in marine time-lapse
surveys Juan Cantillo*, Total E&P
Passive interferometric imaging for limited illumination using
slow-ness diagnosis and directionally constrained Gaussian beam
migration
Carlos Almagro Vidal*, Joost van der Neut, Deyan Draganov, and
Kees Wapenaar, Delft University of Technology; Arie Verdel, TNO
Utrecht and Delft University of Technology
Postearthquake seismic reflection survey, Christchurch, New
Zealand Don C. Lawton*, Malcolm B. Bertram, Kevin W. Hall, and
Kevin L. Bertram, University of Calgary; Jarg Pettinga, University
of Canterbury
Prestack exploding reflector modeling and migration for
anisotropic media: A parameter estimation tool
Tariq Alkhalifah, KAUST, Saudi Arabia
Relative event localization in uncertain velocity model Oleg V.
Poliannikov* and Alison Malcolm, Earth Resources Labora-tory, MIT;
Michael Prange and Hugues Djikpesse, Schlumberger-Doll Research
Robust rank-reduction filtering for erratic noise Stewart
Trickett*, Lynn Burroughs, and Andrew Milton, Fugro Seismic
Imaging
Rock physics of organic shale and its applications Lev Vernik,
Shihong Chi, and Julia Khadeeva, Marathon Oil
Seismic data decomposition into spectral components using
regular-ized nonstationary autoregression
Sergey Fomel, The University of Texas at Austin
SS-wave reflections from P-wave sources in azimuthally
anisotropic media
James Gaiser* and Richard Verm, Geokinetics Inc.
Time-lapse imaging using regularized FWI: A robustness study
Amir Asnaashari*, Romain Brossier, Stephane Garambois, and Jean
Virieux, Institut des Sciences de la Terre, University Joseph
Fourier Grenoble and CNRS; Francois Audebert and Pierre Thore,
TOTAL E&P
Tomographic full waveform inversion: Practical and
computationally feasible approach
Ali Almomin and Biondo Biondi, Stanford University
Using kernel principal component analysis to interpret seismic
signa-tures of thin shaly-sand reservoirs
Piyapa Dejtrakulwong and Gary Mavko, Stanford Rock Physics
Labo-ratory, Stanford University; Tapan Mukerji*, Stanford Center
for Res-ervoir Forecasting, Stanford University
Table 1. Top 30 presentations chosen for Best Paper, listed in
alphabetical order. The asterisk denotes the speaker and/or primary
author.
Dow
nloa
ded
10/2
3/13
to 1
78.1
90.8
8.25
5. R
edist
ribut
ion
subje
ct to
SEG
licen
se or
copy
right;
see T
erms o
f Use
at htt
p://lib
rary.s
eg.or
g/
