
doi: 10.1190/1.1443220
Abstract A number of ways have been offered to calculate instantaneous frequency, an important complex seismic trace attribute. The standard calculation follows directly from its definition and requires two differentiations (Taner et al., 1979). By avoiding these differentiations, three formulas that approximate instantaneous frequency are faster to compute. The first employs a two-point finite-impulse response (FIR) differentiator in place of the derivative filter (Scheuer and Oldenburg, 1988). The second is nearly the same as the first, except that it employs a three-point FIR differentiator (Boashash et al., 1991). The third takes a different approach and involves two approximations (Claerbout, 1976, p. 20; Yilmaz, 1987, p. 521). How do these formulas compare, and which is best?
Geophysics and Sensor Technology, Geophysics, Seismic Waves and Analysis, Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques, Ocean Engineering
Geophysics and Sensor Technology, Geophysics, Seismic Waves and Analysis, Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques, Ocean Engineering
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 61 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
