Exploring Immersive Interfaces for Well Placement Optimization in Reservoir Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the oil and gas industry's ultimate goal is to uncover efficient and economic ways to produce oil and gas, well optimization studies are crucially important for reservoir engineers. Although this task has a major impact on reservoir productivity, it has been challenging for reservoir engineers to perform since it involves time-consuming flow simulations to search a large solution space for an optimal well plan. Our work aims to provide engineers a) an analytical method to perform static connectivity analysis as a proxy for flow simulation, b) an application to support well optimization using our method and c) an immersive experience that benefits engineers and supports their needs and preferences when performing the design and assessment of well trajectories. For the latter purpose, we explore our tool with three immersive environments: a CAVE with a tracked gamepad; a HMD with a tracked gamepad; and a HMD with a Leap Motion controller. This paper describes our application and its techniques in each of the different immersive environments. This paper also describes our findings from an exploratory evaluation conducted with six reservoir engineers, which provided insight into our application, and allowed us to discuss the potential benefits of immersion for the oil and gas domain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".