Convolutional model for seismic data (using a depth model)

[victortxa]

Generate a convolutional model from a depth geological model (Vp; density optional). It's useful to put direct in geology instead of a model in time, avoiding lose the main information. It can be helpful in situations when it's boring to convert from depth to time.

Checklist:

• Make tests for new code
• Create/update docstrings
• Include relevant equations and citations in docstrings
• Code follows PEP8 style conventions
• Code and docs have been spellchecked
• Include new dependencies in docs, requirements.txt, README, and .travis.yml
• Documentation builds properly
• All tests pass
• Can be merged
• Changelog entry (leave for last)
• First-time contributor? Add yourself to doc/contributors.rst (leave for last)

[eusoubrasileiro]

Hi @victortxa. I am really curious about what does it really do. Does it create a synthetic seismic ?
I know that documentation will be provided soon, just wanted to know the general ideia because I might have done something similar in the past.

Cheers and wellcome

[victortxa]

Hi @eusoubrasileiro thank you.
The goal is to take a Vp (density is optional) model in depth and generates the convolutional seismic response in time. In general, the Vp should be given in time (like here: http://www.agilegeoscience.com/blog/2013/12/12/to-make-a-wedge.html ), what makes 'harder' to think geologically. The source is a ricker. @leouieda is introducing me to Git, so I make this pull request to begin, but I'll detail the function asap.
Cheers.

[eusoubrasileiro]

@victortxa nice! some time ago I did this I didn't know about Evan Bianco and agile geoscience. I did as a cookbook for testing obspy... Well but It was too much for just testing obpsy io in a cookbook.

Now It will be really nice to have such a tool, really cool!
Again good initiative keep the good job!

Btw I guess that with so many seismic modules we are heading to need to restruture the seismic package to new inner packages? What do you think @leouieda?

[leouieda]

@victortxa any progress on this?

Could you write an introductory paragraph at the start of the PR description? It should contain a summary of the changes you're making (maybe an example?). Code from #192 will be useful for this (should be merged soon).

[victortxa]

@leouieda Should I write a description of the code or only about the changes I made? About changes do you mean what the code adds to Fatiando? #192 is going to be merged to Fatiando, right? Sorry, I'm still a little confused here.

[leouieda]

Just a general description of what this PR adds. Nothing too big (2-3 sentences is fine).

#192 is practically done so it won't take too long to be merged. Once it is, you can updated your branch and use the plotting functions proposed there.

[leouieda]

@victortxa the first line of the module docstring should describe in a single sentence what this module does. In this case, a good examples would be "Seismic forward modeling by convolution" or "Zero-offset convolutional seismic modeling".

Next, put a small paragraph describing what the functions here do. Very general.

Finally, put a list of the functions present here with a line saying what each does (usually this is the first line of the function docstring).

[leouieda]

@victortxa finally got a chance to review the code. Good job, it looks great!

[victortxa]

@leouieda I think/hope it's everything fine, finally...

[leouieda]

@victortxa I'll have a look at this as soon as I can. Seems that all tests pass and there are no merge conflicts 👍 I just need to take a quick look at the code and see if there is anything missing that I can spot (probably not).

[leouieda]

@victortxa now that I'm thinking about this better, I don't think dt should have a default value. This is the sampling interval of rc and the results would be totally wrong if this value is wrong. So it's better to require the user to think about.

[leouieda]

@victortxa sorry I took so long to look at this. I made a few comments about the function parameters. Not too much to do, just a few tweaks to make the code and the API cleaner. You'll need to adapt the cookbook and tests to the required changes.

After this is done, I think it should be ready to merge. You'll need to merge the fatiando/fatiando master branch into this one before we can merge the PR.

[victortxa]

@leouieda Now I took so long to answer, sorry. Maybe it is easier if I show you the modifications I mentioned above, it will be easier to understand. 😬

[victortxa]

@leouieda Now I guess it's all done.

[leouieda]

@victortxa all seems good to go! Sorry for the long wait. Merging!

[eusoubrasileiro]

Cool!

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Leonardo Uieda notifications@github.com
wrote:

Merged #190 #190.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#190 (comment).

Um homem que fosse só homem e dissesse as coisas que Jesus disse não
seria um grande mestre de moral. Seria um lunático no mesmo nível de um
homem que diz ser um ovo cozido ou então seria o próprio diabo. Cada um de
nós precisa tomar a sua decisão. Ou este homem era, e é, o Filho de Deus,
ou então um louco, ou algo pior... Mas não venhamos com nenhum argumento
complacente que diga que ele foi apenas um grande mestre humano. Ele não
nos deu esta escolha. Nunca pretendeu fazê-lo. C. S. Lewis - Cristianismo
Puro e Simples

[victortxa]

👍 Fine! 😄