Ranking and Upscaling of Geostatistical Reservoir Models Using Streamline Simulation: A Field Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we present a field example where a streamline simulator was used to rank multi-million cell geostatistical reservoir descriptions and to find the optimum level of vertical upscaling for finite-difference simulation. During geostatitstical reservoir characterization, it is a common practice to generate a large number of realizations of the reservoir model to assess the uncertainty in reservoir descriptions and performance predictions. However, only a small fraction of these models can be considered for comprehensive flow simulations because of the high computational costs. A viable alternative is to rank these multiple ‘plausible’ reservoir models based on an appropriate performance criterion that adequately reflects the interaction between heterogeneity and the reservoir flow mechanisms. In this study, we explore the use of ranking based on streamline time of flight connectivity derived from a streamline simulator. The time of flight reflects fluid front propagation at various times and its connectivity at a given time provides us with a direct measure of volumetric sweep efficiency for arbitrary heterogeneity and well configuration. The volumetric sweep efficiency is the simplest measure that reflects the interaction between heterogeneity and the flow field. It is a dynamic measure that can be easily updated to account for changing injection/production conditions. We show that the proposed connectivity criterion can also be used to evaluate the effects of vertical upscaling in the dynamic performance and to determine the optimal level of upscaling for numerical simulation purposes. Our field study involves a Middle Eastern carbonate reservoir under a moderate to strong aquifer influx. The reservoir is on primary depletion and has no injectors. Multiple geostatistical reservoir descriptions were generated using a hierarchical approach whereby the larger level of uncertainty is defined first followed by smaller levels. The aquifer is modeled with a constant pressure boundary and for each time update, the location of the boundary was modified to account for the water encroachment. Using the field-wide sweep efficiency as a performance measure, the realizations were ranked, and used for flow simulation to assess risks associated with various development strategies. Subsequently, three selected realizations were upscaled for the purpose of comprehensive history matching and performance prediction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".