MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057894386 · doi:10.2118/68819-ms

Integration of Production History and Time-lapse Seismic Data Guided by Seismic Attribute Zonation

2001· article· en· W2057894386 on OpenAlexafffund
Xuri Huang, L. R. Bentley, Claude Laflamme

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Western Regional Meeting · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisSeismic attributeGridComputer scienceSeismic to simulationGeologyData miningSeismologySeismic inversionArtificial intelligenceGeodesyGeographyData assimilation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cluster analysis is used to construct fluid flow zones from seismic attributes. The steps are (1) remove grid points that contain outliers in any seismic attribute; (2) scale each attribute to zero mean and unit variance; (3) use principal component analysis to transform the scaled attributes to uncorrelated principal component attributes; (4) principal component attributes are grouped into categories of similar seismic response using cluster analysis; (5) upscale the seismic grid to the computational grid scale using a weighted voting procedure (morphing); (6) spatially filter cluster assignments to remove small, isolated spots using a weighted voting scheme; (7) assign a seismic zone to spatially connected elements with the same cluster category. After zonation, rock properties such as porosity and permeability are perturbed as a group within each zone instead of node by node in order to match historical production and seismic data. Using a Gulf of Mexico test case, the zoning procedure produced useful computational zones and reduced the time required for history matching.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Western Regional MeetingSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207