MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048736155 · doi:10.1071/aseg2015ab092

Using Multivariate Data Classification on Frontier Exploration Basins to Enhance the Information Value of Suboptimal 2D Seismic Surveys for Unconventional Reservoir Characterization

2015· article· en· W2048736155 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Handwerger, Roberto Castaneda-Aguilar, Don Stachiw, Roberto Suárez-Rivera

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyConsistency (knowledge bases)WorkflowStructural basinReservoir modelingSeismic inversionData qualityFrontierSeismic to simulationData miningSeismologyComputer sciencePetroleum engineeringGeomorphologyEngineeringGeographyArtificial intelligenceDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We developed a workflow that allows integrating legacy 2D seismic surveys with modern log and core data, validating their consistency, classifying them into rock classes with consistent properties, propagating material properties across each of these rock classes, and using this information to improve reservoir characterization and the assessment of their hydrocarbon resource potential. As proof of concept, we analyzed two intersecting 2D seismic lines shot in 2001 in a frontier basin in Canada to determine the distribution of reservoir quality. Each of these had been separately prestack inverted, but have modern core and log data (as well as legacy log data) which were integrated with the inverted attributes.Results identify a most prospective class for reservoir quality within the zone of interest, and show that it increases in thickness to the south in the seismic section.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207