Performance Assessment of Ensemble Kalman Filter and Markov Chain Monte Carlo under Forecast Model Uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) and Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) are popular methods to obtain the posterior distribution of unknown parameters in the reservoir model. However, millions of simulation runs may be required in MCMC for accurate sampling of posterior as subsurface flow problems are highly nonlinear and non-Gaussian. Similarly, EnKF formulated on the basis of linear and Gaussian assumptions may also require a large number of realizations to correctly map the solution space of the unknown model parameters, ultimately resulting in the high computational cost. Data-driven meta/surrogate/proxy models provide an alternative solution to alleviate the issue of high computational cost. Since these models are not as accurate as numerical solutions of partial differential equations (PDE), their implementation may add an uncertainty in the forecast model. In literature, the effect of uncertainty in forecast model on data assimilation is not well studied, especially with field-scale reservoir models. In this work, we propose the robust assisted history matching workflow using polynomial chaos expansion (PCE) based forecast model. Proposed forecast model relies on reducing parameter space using Karhunen–Loeve (KL) expansion which preserves the two-point statistics of the field. Random variables from KL expansion and orthogonal polynomials corresponding to the prior probability density function (pdf) form the set of input parameters in PCE. Further, non-intrusive probabilistic collocation method (PCM) is used to compute PCE coefficients. PCE forecast model is then used in EnKF and MCMC to calculate the likelihood of the samples in place of high fidelity full physics simulation runs. A case study is performed using a 3D field scale model of a reservoir located near Fort McMurray in northern Alberta, Canada. Performance of EnKF and MCMC are assessed under forecast model uncertainty using rigorous qualitative and quantitative analysis and posterior distribution characterization. Results clearly depict that, although EnKF provided reliable mean and variance estimates of model parameters, MCMC outperformed the former even under the uncertainty associated with PCE metamodel. Inaccurate initial assumptions of model parameters were successfully handled by MCMC, although, with a longer burn-in period. Furthermore, characterization of posterior demonstrated reduced uncertainty in the estimation of model parameters using MCMC as compared to EnKF. Practical implications of the proposed approach and performance assessment under forecast model uncertainty will be consequential in designing accurate and computationally efficient reservoir characterization and optimization workflows and hence, improved decision-making in reservoir management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".