MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915830234 · doi:10.2118/1015-0084-jpt

Technology Focus: Data Management and Communication (October 2015)

2015· article· en· W2915830234 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luigi Saputelli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaceAutomationProfitability indexComputer scienceBig dataSupply chainBusiness intelligenceAnalyticsData scienceUpstream (networking)Process managementBusinessKnowledge managementEngineeringTelecommunicationsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology Focus I would like to highlight three main trends that most exploration-and-production (E&P) operators are facing across the globe—the value of reservoir-surveillance information, the slow pace of automation and instrumentation, and the way forward. The Value of Reservoir-Surveillance Information Global energy demand will grow more than 33% by 2035. Most of the supply will come from the oil industry, if we do our job right. As demand rises, the complexities also increase. The prime value of data captured through continuous surveillance is letting the reservoirs talk. Reservoirs talk through information and knowledge derived from data capture, analysis, and integration. This results in proper understanding and prognosis through applying better analytics and, thus, improving the decision-making process. In this way, we will be able to extend the lives of mature fields, discover new fields, improve refining and manufacturing efficiency, enable smart awareness, optimize corporate-scale operations, dynamically respond to supply and demand, integrate business and support functions across supply chain and geography, manage proactive growth, integrate information among all assets, and implement greater intelligence. Slow Pace of Automation and Instrumentation There is no question that smarter work flows enabled by digital automation increase profitability. To realize such opportunities, industry has been deploying hardware for sensing and actuation in the last 3 decades, in combination with data-driven modeling and remote collaboration. Many major oil fields around the world would not be producing today if not for opportune field automation. However, building such capability across the globe has not been solid enough. Ninety percent of worldwide mid- to large-size operators (i.e., 100,000 BOPD or more) have embraced oilfield automation in the simplest form; however, less than 1% of such equivalent production has a consistent application of data-to-knowledge transformation. The slow acceptance of the technology is because of the short-term gratification from profitable and low-risk operations, lack of knowledge of the added value from related technologies, and management blindness. What Is Next? Many business and digital corporations claim that between 100 billion and 200 billion devices could be connected by 2020. Young engineers may not understand why it is not possible to access any real-time well data from his mobile device, understand its past performance, and allow the simulation of multiple scenarios to see the impact of decisions. With close to a billion people connected at any moment playing online strategy games, how is it possible that our industry is still so far behind with respect to the gaming philosophy? JPT Recommended additional reading at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org. SPE 170680 Predicting Failures From Oilfield Sensor Data Using Time-Series Shapelets by Om Prasad Patri, University of Southern California, et al. SPE 171636 A Flowback-Guided Approach for Production-Data Analysis in Tight Reservoirs by O.D. Ezulike, University of Alberta, et al. SPE 170633 Data as an Asset: What the Upstream Oil and Gas Industry Can Learn About Big Data From Social Media by Robert K. Perrons, Queensland University of Technology, et al. SPE 173416 Addressing Oil and Gas Big-Data Challenges at the Remote Edge by Serhii Konovalov, et al. IPTC 17997 Intelligent-Field Real- Time Data Reliability Key Performance Indices by Abdulrahman A. Al-Amer, Saudi Aramco, et al.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207