MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974730941 · doi:10.2118/162309-ms

Joint AVO Inversion for Time-Lapse Elastic Reservoir Properties

2012· article· en· W1974730941 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ayato Kato, Robert R. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueAbu Dhabi International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBaseline (sea)Inversion (geology)WaveletSeismic surveyGeologySeismic inversionSeismologyGeodesyAlgorithmComputer scienceMathematicsGeometryTectonicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For time-lapse seismic inversion, it is common that baseline and monitor survey data are separately inverted to elastic properties. Elastic property changes are obtained from difference in the two inversion results. Buland and Quair (2006) proposed novel time-lapse inversion method based on the Bayesian theorem, in which posterior distribution of elastic property change are obtained from seismic data difference between two surveys along with the prior information. However, individual elastic properties at baseline (or repeat) survey cannot be simultaneously obtained. Moreover, they assumed constant wavelet although individual wavelets are commonly used in different vintage data. Therefore, to overcome the limitations, we have developed a new time-lapse seismic inversion method. The method uses both baseline and monitor survey data, instead of only uses the difference, and simultaneously obtains elastic properties (e.g., P- and S-wave velocities and density) at baseline survey and the changes at monitor survey as well as the uncertainties. Furthermore, the developed method allows us to use individual wavelet in each seismic data, resulting in multicomponent data which can be used. The method is applied to Hangingstone oilfield in Canada, where heavy-oil with 8.5 °API has been produced by SAGD method and time-lapse seismic data were acquired; baseline survey in 2002 and repeat survey in 2006. Both P-P and P-S data are available in the monitor survey while only P-P data is available in the baseline survey. We use all the available seismic data to obtain initial elastic properties at the baseline survey, which reasonably well agree with well log data, as well as the elastic property change due to steam injection. Furthermore, the elastic property change is converted to temperature change within reservoir by using heavy-oil rock physics model, which are reasonably consistent with measurement at observation wells.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAbu Dhabi International Petroleum Conference and ExhibitionSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207