Computation of dry-rock <i>V</i> P/ <i>V</i> S ratio, fluid property factor, and density estimation from amplitude-variation-with-offset inversion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Estimating the fluid property factor and density from amplitude-variation-with-offset (AVO) inversion is important for fluid identification and reservoir characterization. The fluid property factor can distinguish pore fluid in the reservoir and the density estimate aids in evaluating reservoir characteristics. However, if the scaling factor of the fluid property factor (the dry-rock VP/VS ratio) is chosen inappropriately, the fluid property factor is not only related to the pore fluid, but it also contains a contribution from the rock skeleton. On the other hand, even if the angle gathers include large angles (offsets), a three-parameter AVO inversion struggles to estimate an accurate density term without additional constraints. Thus, we have developed an equation to compute the dry-rock VP/VS ratio using only the P- and S-wave velocities and density of the saturated rock from well-logging data. This decouples the fluid property factor from lithology. We also developed a new inversion method to estimate the fluid property factor and density parameters, which takes full advantage of the high stability of a two-parameter AVO inversion. By testing on a portion of the Marmousi 2 model, we find that the fluid property factor calculated by the dry-rock VP/VS ratio obtained by our method relates to the pore-fluid property. Simultaneously, we test the AVO inversion method for estimating the fluid property factor and density parameters on synthetic data and analyze the feasibility and stability of the inversion. A field-data example indicates that the fluid property factor obtained by our method distinguishes the oil-charged sand channels and the water-wet sand channel from the well logs.
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".