MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774214862 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23096

Real‐time feedback control of SAGD wells using model predictive control to optimize steam chamber development under uncertainty

2017· article· en· W2774214862 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsModel predictive controlMultivariable calculusSteam injectionController (irrigation)Control theory (sociology)Optimal controlEngineeringPetroleum engineeringInjection wellControl engineeringControl (management)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The efficiency of steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) operation depends on developing a uniform steam chamber by maintaining an optimal subcool temperature along the length of the well pair. Implementing operational parameters obtained from model‐based optimization directly in the field may not lead to the desired subcool temperature. Based on the real‐time measurements from surface and downhole sensors, along with other well and surface constraint information, a real‐time feedback control of SAGD well pairs can be implemented to optimize subcool and steam chamber development. Model predictive control (MPC), which is a multivariable constrained controller, provides a framework for such control. To evaluate the use of MPC for real‐time control of SAGD wells, a case study is performed using a 3D heterogeneous reservoir model. Porosity and permeability realizations are created and ranked based on net present value (NPV). One of the realizations is considered as the ‘true’ reservoir, and two other realizations are selected to represent different cases of uncertain reservoir models. For each model, a reservoir simulator is used to find the optimum rates and subcool temperature, which become the set‐points for MPC to operate the wells. We compare the steam chamber growth and NPV calculated using MPC with the base case where no MPC is used and discuss the implementation advantages. Since MPC led to expedited and accurate tracking of optimized operating targets obtained using reservoir models, ∼18 % improvement in NPV is achieved compared to manual open‐loop application of optimum rates, a practice used commonly in the field.

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)0.001
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 score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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