Pattern-Based History Matching for Reservoirs with Complex Geologic Facies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract History matching is performed to obtain reservoir models that reproduce the historical production data while adhering to available prior geologic knowledge and observed static data. In automated history matching workflows, prior models of reservoir properties are continuously updated to match the incoming production history. A challenging problem is to ensure that after applying updates to prior models, the resulting history matched models remain geologically consistent. This is particularly challenging in formations with complex connectivity patterns, e.g., fluvial meandering and curvilinear channels, where preserving the distinct shape and continuity of the underlying geologic features is non-trivial. In this work, we introduce a novel machine learning approach with the aim of preserving the main connectivity patterns of the prior reservoir models during history matching of complex geologic formations. We formulate the history matching problem by defining a feasible set of connectivity patterns that are described by a large number of model realizations. The feasible set encompasses the range of connectivity patterns of the expected geologic objects in the prescribed conceptual model by geologists. A supervised machine learning algorithm is then introduced to learn a mapping operator between any given model and its closest model in the feasible set. For this purpose, a learning dataset, i.e., a set of feature/label pairs, is constructed from the representative samples of the feasible set. The k-Nearest Neighbor (k-NN) classification algorithm is then applied to relate the local connectivity patterns in the feasible set that are closest to the patterns in a proposed model outside the feasible set. The learned mapping operator is invoked during history matching, where the misfit between model-predicted and observed historical production data is minimized while honoring the connectivity in the prior feasible set. The history matching is performed using a two-step alternating directions optimization algorithm, in which the first step implements a gradient-based continuous minimization procedure to decrease the data mismatch objective function while the second step maps the obtained solution from the first step onto the prior feasible set. History matching case studies in channelized reservoirs demonstrate that the proposed supervised learning approach can learn the complex geologic patterns in the feasible set and use them during history matching to preserve the feasible connectivity patterns. The results suggest that the proposed classification and clustering approach can facilitate patter-based history matching problems by learning geologic features from prior models and using them to impose geologic feasibility.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».