
doi: 10.1190/1.2792575
Following the groundbreaking work of Crampin (1985), Alford (1986), Lynn and Thomsen (1990) and Lewis et al (1991), it quickly became conventional wisdom in the industry that substantial shear-wave azimuthal anisotropy is nearly ubiquitous in the subsurface. Crampin and Zatsepin (1995) made theoretical arguments that implied that most of the subsurface is azimuthally anisotropic. As industry’s ability to measure and quantify azimuthal anisotropy at a variety of scales has grown, this assumption has remained largely unexamined. Looking at over a dozen datasets, including surface 9-C seismic, 9-C VSPs, and dipole sonic logs at a number of locations in the Western US and Alberta, I have seen little unambiguous evidence of azimuthal shear-wave anisotropy despite polarization analysis of each dataset.
| 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). | 0 | |
| 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. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
