Application of the Multiwell Productivity Index-Based Method to Evaluate Interwell Connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Numerous studies have concluded that connectivity is one of the most important factors controlling success of improved oil recovery processes. Interwell connectivity evaluation can help identify flow barriers and conduits and provide tools for reservoir management and production optimization. The multiwell productivity index (MPI)-based method provides the connectivity indices between well pairs based on injection/production data. By decoupling the effects of well locations, skin factors, injection rates, and the producers’ bottomhole pressures from the calculated connectivity, the heterogeneity matrix obtained by this method solely represents the heterogeneity and possible anisotropy of the formation. Previously, the MPI method was developed for bounded reservoirs with limited numbers of wells. In this paper, we extend the MPI method to deal with cases of large numbers of wells and open reservoirs. To handle open reservoirs, we applied some modifications to the MPI method by adding a virtual well to the system and by modifying the pore volume. We applied the modifications in two nonvolumetric systems where there was either a leaking zone or an isolated zone, and found the approaches using the virtual well could predict the reservoir performance accurately. In cases with large numbers of wells, the required computational time to calculate the heterogeneity matrix may make the problem intractable. Therefore, we applied a model reduction strategy based on the location of the wells, called windowing. This technique ignores the parameters that have smaller effects on reservoir performance. We applied windowing to two cases with large numbers of wells (16 and 41 wells). We observed that, by selecting the proper window size, we can predict the reservoir performance accurately (R2 values greater than 99%) and decrease the CPU time up to a factor of 20 for the studied cases. The approaches described enabled us to provide realistic interpretations of interwell connectivity for complex cases where the simple MPI method would be difficult to apply. Integration of these approaches with the MPI method can quickly and efficiently model field data to optimize well patterns and flood parameters.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".