@article {kumar2017hrc,
	title = {Highly repeatable 3D compressive full-azimuth towed-streamer time-lapse acquisition {\textendash}- a numerical feasibility study at scale},
	journal = {The Leading Edge},
	volume = {36},
	number = {8},
	year = {2017},
	note = {(The Leading Edge)},
	month = {08},
	pages = {677-687},
	abstract = {Most conventional 3D time-lapse (or 4D) acquisitions are ocean-bottom cable (OBC) or ocean-bottom node (OBN) surveys since these surveys are relatively easy to replicate compared to towed-streamer surveys. To attain high degrees of repeatability, survey replicability and dense periodic sampling has become the norm for 4D surveys that renders this technology expensive. Conventional towed-streamer acquisitions suffer from limited illumination of subsurface due to narrow azimuth. Although, acquisition techniques such as multi-azimuth, wide-azimuth, rich-azimuth acquisition, etc., have been developed to illuminate the subsurface from all possible angles, these techniques can be prohibitively expensive for densely sampled surveys. This leads to uneven sampling, i.e., dense receiver and coarse source sampling or vice-versa, in order to make these acquisitions more affordable. Motivated by the design principles of Compressive Sensing (CS), we acquire economic, randomly subsampled (or compressive) and simultaneous towed-streamer time-lapse data without the need of replicating the surveys. We recover densely sampled time-lapse data on one and the same periodic grid by using a joint-recovery model (JRM) that exploits shared information among different time-lapse recordings, coupled with a computationally cheap and scalable rank-minimization technique. The acquisition is low cost since we have subsampled measurements (about 70\% subsampled), simulated with a simultaneous long-offset acquisition configuration of two source vessels travelling across a survey area at random azimuths. We analyze the performance of our proposed compressive acquisition and subsequent recovery strategy by conducting a synthetic, at scale, seismic experiment on a 3D time-lapse model containing geological features such as channel systems, dipping and faulted beds, unconformities and a gas cloud. Our findings indicate that the insistence on replicability between surveys and the need for OBC/OBN 4D surveys can, perhaps, be relaxed. Moreover, this is a natural next step beyond the successful CS acquisition examples discussed in this special issue.},
	keywords = {3D, CS, marine, rank minimization, simultaneous long offset, time-lapse seismic},
	doi = {10.1190/tle36080677.1},
	url = {https://slim.gatech.edu/Publications/Public/Journals/TheLeadingEdge/2017/kumar2017hrc/kumar2017hrc.html},
	author = {Rajiv Kumar and Haneet Wason and Shashin Sharan and Felix J. Herrmann}
}
@article {oghenekohwo2017hrt,
	title = {Highly repeatable time-lapse seismic with distributed Compressive Sensing{\textendash}-mitigating effects of calibration errors},
	journal = {The Leading Edge},
	volume = {36},
	number = {8},
	year = {2017},
	note = {(The Leading Edge)},
	month = {08},
	pages = {688-694},
	abstract = {Recently, we demonstrated that combining joint recovery with low-cost non-replicated randomized sampling tailored to time-lapse seismic can give us access to high fidelity, highly repeatable, dense prestack vintages, and high-grade time-lapse. To arrive at this result, we assumed well-calibrated surveys{\textendash}-i.e., we presumed accurate post-plot source/receiver positions. Unfortunately, in practice seismic surveys are prone to calibration errors, which are unknown deviations between actual and post-plot acquisition geometry. By means of synthetic experiments, we analyze the possible impact of these errors on vintages and on time-lapse data obtained with our joint recovery model from compressively sampled surveys. Supported by these experiments, we demonstrate that highly repeatable time-lapse vintages are attainable despite the presence of unknown calibration errors in the positions of the shots. We assess the repeatability quantitatively for two scenarios by studying the impact of calibration errors on conventional dense but irregularly sampled surveys and on low-cost compressed surveys. To separate time-lapse effects from calibration issues, we consider the idealized case where the subsurface remains unchanged and the practical situation where time-lapse changes are restricted to a subset of the data. In both cases, the quality of the recovered vintages and time-lapse decreases gracefully for low-cost compressed surveys with increasing calibration errors. Conversely, the quality of vintages from expensive densely periodically sampled surveys decreases more rapidly as unknown and difficult to control calibration errors increase.},
	keywords = {calibration errors, joint-recovery method, marine, random sampling, time-lapse seismic},
	doi = {10.1190/tle36080688.1},
	url = {https://slim.gatech.edu/Publications/Public/Journals/TheLeadingEdge/2017/oghenekohwo2017hrt/oghenekohwo2017hrt.html},
	author = {Felix Oghenekohwo and Felix J. Herrmann}
}
@article {Friedlander11TRhdm,
	title = {Hybrid deterministic-stochastic methods for data fitting},
	journal = {SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing},
	volume = {34},
	number = {3},
	year = {2012},
	month = {01},
	pages = {A1380-A1405},
	abstract = {Many structured data-fitting applications require the solution of an optimization problem involving a sum over a potentially large number of measurements. Incremental gradient algorithms (both deterministic and randomized) offer inexpensive iterations by sampling only subsets of the terms in the sum. These methods can make great progress initially, but often slow as they approach a solution. In contrast, full gradient methods achieve steady convergence at the expense of evaluating the full objective and gradient on each iteration. We explore hybrid methods that exhibit the benefits of both approaches. Rate of convergence analysis and numerical experiments illustrate the potential for the approach.},
	keywords = {Optimization},
	doi = {10.1137/110830629},
	author = {Michael P. Friedlander and Mark Schmidt}
}
