Bayesian History-Matching and Probabilistic Forecasting for Tight and Shale Wells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The fracturing of horizontal wells is a recently developed tool to help enable tight and shale formations to produce economically. Production data analysis of the wells in such formations is frequently performed using analytical and semi-analytical methods. However, in the presence of nonlinearities such as multi-phase flow and geomechanical effects, the numerical simulations are necessary for interpretations and history-matching techniques as they are required for model calibration. Reservoir history-matching techniques are usually based on the frequentist approach and can provide a single solution that can maximize the Likelihood function. Production forecasts using a single calibrated model cannot honor the uncertainty in the model parameters. Therefore, a Bayesian approach is suggested where we can combine our prior knowledge about the model parameters together with the Likelihood to update our knowledge in light of the data. The Bayesian approach is enriched by applying a Markov chain Monte Carlo process to updated the prior knowledge and approximate the posterior distributions. In this paper, a one-year production data of a real gas condensate well in a Canadian tight formation (lower Montney Formation) is considered. This is a horizontal well with eight fracture stages. A representative 2D model is constructed which is characterized by 17 parameters which include relative permeability curves, capillary pressure, geomechanical effects, fracture half-length, fracture conductivity, and permeability and water saturation in the stimulated region and the matrix. Careful analysis of available data provide acceptable prior ranges for the model parameters using non-informative uniform distributions. Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm is implemented using a Gibbs sampler and the posterior distributions are found. The results provide an acceptable set of models that can represent the production history data. Using these distributions, a probabilistic forecast is performed and P10, P50 and P90 are estimated. This paper highlights the limitations of the current history-matching approaches and provides a novel workflow on how to quantify the uncertainty for the shale and tight formations using numerical simulations to provide reliable probabilistic forecasts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".