MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077178138 · doi:10.2118/05-03-03

Markov Chain Monte Carlo for Modelling Permeability Variations in Reservoirs

2005· article· en· W2077178138 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuchen Zhang, Sanjay Srinivasan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsShell (Canada)
FundersShell Canada
KeywordsMarkov chain Monte CarloMonte Carlo methodGibbs samplingComputer scienceRandom fieldVariogramProbability distributionSampling (signal processing)Markov chainKrigingMathematical optimizationMathematicsStatisticsBayesian probabilityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate representation of reservoir heterogeneity using stochastic modelling techniques requires careful synthesis of the multivariate probability distribution characterizing the spatial variations of petrophysical properties. A well designed scheme for sampling from that distribution is necessary in order to accurately portray the uncertainty in identifying reservoir properties arising from our imperfect knowledge of the reservoir under study. That uncertainty is data-dependent and most importantly, model-dependent. The paper presents a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methodology for sampling from the invariant or stationary probability distribution characterizing the reservoir permeability field. An initial random field is perturbed successively following a Gibbs sampling procedure. The updated values at the perturbed node are obtained by sampling from local probability distributions obtained by kriging. This iterative updating procedure is continued until a prescribed large number of iterations are performed. Hard data, histogram, and variogram models are honoured, as expected. The multiple point histogram (MPH) and entropy of MPH are used to assess the joint spatial uncertainty exhibited by the MCMC model. The paper also discusses and demonstrates a new approach for integrating secondary information within the MCMC framework. The reduction in joint spatial uncertainty subsequent to integrating the secondary information is demonstrated. Introduction The assessment of uncertainty is a crucial step for decisionmakers to reduce the financial risks during the development of a reservoir. The uncertainty in reservoir performance predictions is usually reflected by a number of parameters of interest, such as OIP, production profiles, ultimate recovery, and any forecast figure, etc. Reservoir complexity and the lack of data available are two main reasons that lead to uncertainty in reservoir modeling(1). Several papers(1–4) have addressed the issue of uncertainty assessment in detail. However, all efforts for quantifying uncertainty are model and data specific. The true reservoir permeability field is entirely characterized by a multivariate probability distribution describing the joint uncertainty in permeability at all locations in the reservoir. That multivariate distribution is usually unknown and hence the objective of stochastic simulation is to obtain the requisite multivariate distribution using the available data and the prior model for spatial continuity (or variability). Ultimately, this posterior probability distribution is sampled in order to obtain realizations of the permeability field. In this paper, a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) procedure is used to update and sample from the posterior probability density function. The simulation commences from an initial kriged map. The local conditional probability distribution at each location is constructed using the values at neighbouring locations and subsequently, a value is sampled from that distribution. A Gibbs sampler is utilized implying that the sampled value is retained regardless of whether the mismatch against target statistics increases. The procedure is continued at all locations by following a random path. This iterative procedure is continued until a final realization is obtained that identifies target statistics, such as the prior variogram and/or the prior histogram of permeability values. The details of the MCMC algorithm are described next.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian Petroleum TechnologySame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207