ArticleScientific reports2026
Determining acoustic impedance cube by inverting seismic data using feedforward and radial basis neural networks in an Iranian oilfield.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate three-dimensional acoustic impedance modeling in offshore clastic reservoirs remains a significant challenge due to sparse well control and the highly nonlinear relationship between seismic attributes and subsurface elastic properties. This study introduces an integrated, physics-guided machine learning (ML) workflow that combines rock-physics-driven pseudo-well generation with neural networks to directly map seismic attributes to acoustic impedance under data-limited conditions. A soft-sand rock physics workflow was applied, in which grain moduli were determined using the Voigt-Reuss-Hill average. The dry rock frame was modeled at critical porosity by Hertz-Mindlin contact theory and then interpolated toward zero porosity using the Modified Hashin-Shtrikman lower bound. Gassmann fluid substitution was subsequently performed. Using this approach, 45 pseudo-wells were generated and conditioned through lithofacies classification and spatial statistics, mitigating the risk of overfitting associated with the three available real wells. Six seismic attributes-envelope, RMS amplitude, instantaneous phase, instantaneous frequency, quadrature trace, and sweetness-were selected as predictors. Two neural architectures, a multi-layer feedforward network (MLFN) and a radial basis function network (RBFN), were trained and benchmarked using a leave-one-well-out cross-validation scheme. The MLFN achieved higher predictive accuracy (CC = 0.87, NRMSE = 0.493) compared to the RBFN (CC = 0.79, NRMSE = 0.613), which may reflect its greater capacity to model broader hierarchical relationships between seismic attributes and acoustic impedance. The resulting impedance volume delineates laterally coherent high-impedance sandstone units and low-impedance porous intervals consistent with geological interpretation. These results suggest that integrating physics-guided pseudo-well augmentation with feed-forward neural networks offers a practical and computationally efficient approach for acoustic impedance inversion in data-limited offshore settings. Future work may explore validation across diverse geological settings to assess the robustness and transferability of the proposed methodology. This study provides a basis for hybrid and uncertainty-aware inversion frameworks that may help address complexities in heterogeneous reservoir systems, highlighting the importance of reproducible and widely applicable data-driven seismic inversion methods under sparse well control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.