MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2203629972 · doi:10.3968/7578

Forecasting Petroleum Production Using the Time-Series Prediction of Artificial Neural Network

2015· article· en· W2203629972 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dan Ba, Guangren Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in petroleum exploration and development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkSeries (stratigraphy)Production (economics)ResidualAlgorithmComputer scienceTime seriesArtificial intelligenceBackpropagationData miningMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to present a special back-propagation neural network (BPNN) with two techniques of the optimal learning time count (OLTC) and the time-series prediction (TSP) for forecasting petroleum production in Chinese oilfields, as well as algorithm applicability. In general, when different algorithms are used to solve a real-world problem, they often produce different solution accuracies, and an algorithm is used to solve real-world problems, it often produces different solution accuracies. Toward this issue, the solution accuracy is expressed with the total mean absolute relative residual for all samples, R (%); and it is proposed that an algorithm is applicable if R (%) ≤ 5 , otherwise this algorithm is inapplicable. Two case studies of China have been used to validate the proposed approach. The application results of this special BPNN are R (%) = 2.18 in Case study 1 while R (%) = 2.05 in Case study 2. From these results, it is concluded that: (a) this special BPNN for forecasting petroleum production in Chinese oilfields is feasible and practical; and (b) the definition of solution accuracy R (%), and the threshold of algorithm applicability ( R (%) ≤ 5 ) for an algorithm, are feasible and practical, too.

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)0.000
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 score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in petroleum exploration and developmentSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207