MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101085334 · doi:10.5539/jgg.v1n1p47

Fuzzy C-means Clustering for 3D Seismic Parameters Processing

2009· article· en· W2101085334 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhao Fuqun, Liang Le

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geography and Geology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Computational Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReservoir modelingCluster analysisSeismic inversionSeismic attributeFuzzy logicSaturation (graph theory)GeologyCharacterization (materials science)Seismic explorationPetroleum engineeringData miningComputer scienceSeismologyArtificial intelligenceMathematicsGeometryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3D seismic parameters can reflect the features of petroleum reservoir from different profiles. By analizing the3D seismic parameters, we can assess the parameters of the reservoir characterization, such as deposition,structure and growth history, fluid saturation and so on. The traditional clustering methods can’t capture thedegree of similarity between reservoir parameters very well, so we introduced in this paper the application offuzzy C-means (FCM) clustering for the processing of 3D seismic parameters. It begins with the analizing therelationship between 3D seismic parameters and reservoir characterization parameters, and then we process the3D seismic parameters with FCM and assess the parameters of reservoir characterization. The testing resultsshow that FCM can classify the 3D parameters more accurately and provide a good evidence for the researchof petroleum reservoir.

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)0.007
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geography and GeologySame topicAdvanced Computational Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207