MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088117832 · doi:10.2118/166198-ms

Estimating Proved Reserves in Tight/Shale Wells Using the Modified SEPD Method

2013· article· en· W2088117832 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
FundersConocoPhillips
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringOil shalePetroleumGeologyTight gasPermeability (electromagnetism)Tight oilProduction (economics)Well loggingFossil fuelOil productionEnvironmental scienceEngineeringPaleontologyHydraulic fracturingWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to their simplicity, empirical production forecasting methods have been used by the petroleum industry for decades. Since 2008, a number of empirical methods have been introduced to the petroleum industry, specifically for wells located in tight/shale reservoirs. However, most of these new methods are not reliable for forecasting remaining reserves, although they may appear to be very good for forecasting EUR in wells in which a high percentage of the EUR has already been produced. The Stretched Exponential Production Decline (SEPD) Method was introduced in 2010. Our results from analysis of both synthetic and actual field data by using SEPD have indicated that this method will most likely underestimate EUR in reservoirs with permeability ranging from 0.1mD to 0.0001mD. A modified SEPD (YM-SEPD) Method has therefore been developed to eliminate the SEPD Method's shortcoming by employing a new specialized plot to find all related parameters. This newly developed method is very easy to use and, most importantly, it will yield a much more reliable production and remaining reserve prediction for tight horizontal wells. With longer production histories, remaining reserves can be forecasted even more accurately and with a high confidence level. Hundreds of horizontal wells including oil wells from various formations (Cadomin, Montney, Notikewin, Cardium, Barnett Shale, Muskwa, etc.), hydraulically fractured in various ways, have been analyzed using the modified SEPD (YM-SEPD) method. Results indicate that reliable EURs and production profiles can be predicted readily for wells having only two to three years of production history. For wells having less than two years of production history, the modified SEPD (YM-SEPD) Method can also yield reasonable production forecasts when coupled with Duong's empirical method. This paper presents the application of the modified SEPD (YM-SEPD) Method to a number of actual and synthetic oil and gas wells to estimate their proved reserves, including horizontal wells producing dry, wet and retrograde gas as well as tight oil. These examples have had production histories with either observed or non-observed boundary-dominated flow (BDF). The examples also illustrate how the modified SEPD (YM-SEPD) method is capable of estimating proven reserves with high confidence.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.276 · 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