MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1899580999 · doi:10.1306/13301415m961039

Proxy Models for Fast Transfer of Static Uncertainty to Reservoir Performance Uncertainty

2011· book-chapter· en· W1899580999 on OpenAlexaff
Jose Walter Vanegas, Luciane Cunha, Clayton V. Deutsch

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Association of Petroleum Geologists eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProxy (statistics)Petroleum engineeringWorkflowField (mathematics)Uncertainty analysisComputer scienceNatural gas fieldOperations researchIndustrial engineeringGeologyEngineeringSimulationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Petroleum reservoirs are heterogeneous and, therefore, uncertain. Heterogeneity and uncertainty are important for reservoir management. The transfer of geologic uncertainty through process performance is commonly achieved with flow simulation; however, full physics flow simulation requires significant professional and computer time. A proxy model tuned to the specific recovery process provides a means to quickly predict performance uncertainty caused by multiple geologic models and uncertain operating conditions. A limited number of flow simulation runs are used to calibrate the proxy, then calculations proceed quickly. The classical response surface approach is also illustrated. Details are given to the application of proxy models to the steam-assisted gravity drainage process. A proxy model based on the Butler steam-assisted gravity drainage theory is developed to predict the oil flow rate, cumulative oil production, and cumulative steam injection profiles during the rising and spreading steam chamber periods of a steam-assisted gravity drainage well pair. A synthetic example shows the efficiency of the methodology in terms of computation time and predictability. Investment decisions follow an information cycle that starts with acquisition, processing, and interpretation of subsurface data, creating the information needed to construct geostatistical models used to assess reservoir performance using criteria such as the number and type of wells. Different field development scenarios are considered, and decision criteria are applied to select and implement the optimum production scheme. Once wells are drilled and production starts, more information is available for optimizing decisions. The decisions made early in a reservoir life cycle are perhaps the most important, and they have to be made with limited information. Generating multiple geostatistical realizations to represent the state of uncertainty related to the actual reservoir properties is becoming common ( Deutsch and Journel, 1998). The available well data early in reservoir development sample less than one-trillionth of the reservoir. Seismic data provide more extensive data coverage but at a larger scale and with less precision related to reservoir facies, porosity, and permeability. The uncertainty is large; however, 100 or fewer realizations are commonly considered adequate to permit assessment of resources at 10, 50, and 90% confidence levels.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Association of Petroleum Geologists eBooksSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207