MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917740703 · doi:10.2118/0515-0102-jpt

Technology Focus: Intelligent Fields Technology (May 2015)

2015· article· en· W2917740703 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Hudson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Artificial neural networkComputer scienceMainstreamFocus (optics)Artificial intelligenceService (business)Operations researchData scienceEngineeringMarketingBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology Focus In the late 1990s, a friend in the office showed me a cobbled-together neural network in Excel that was driving (then Hyprotech, now Aspen) Hysys such that the calculation speeds were significantly faster than those in the more-rigorous but wandering solution that Hysys alone could yield. While interesting and a good solution for that problem, it seemed to me at the time something that a hobbyist would do in the evenings. During the past few years, it has become painfully obvious that such a dismissive conclusion is outdated. Artificial-intelligence (AI) -based methods have become mainstream engineering, and we as practitioners need to have a firm understanding of the principles and be ready to apply them when the opportunities arise. AI-related papers now make up a significant fraction of the overall literature in intelligent fields. For example, during the past year, Ikezue and Onukwuli have shown how neural networks can be used to control gas production in multilaterals. Baarimah et al. used a variety of techniques, including neural networks and fuzzy logic, to predict reservoir-fluid properties and demonstrated why this could be a better approach to a single correlation choice. Alzate et al. used neural networks to generate and test artificial well logs to assist in geomechanical evaluations. Note that these papers and others presented in the last year come not only from academic institutions but increasingly from operators and service providers reporting how these techniques are being used to make business decisions. Why have these technologies gained traction? The answer, of course, is partly that the technologies have matured, though the basics have clearly been in place for some time. The more important trends are a vast increase in the availability of data and the increasing need to make business decisions before the physics of the problem is understood well enough to form a reasonable physical model. AI has emerged as a go-to solution type to help us build physical insight into problems where the complexity or heterogeneity of the problem makes a comprehensive physical model still too difficult to pose. Among the articles featured in the section, you will find some enlightening examples that illustrate the utility of these approaches. JPT Recommended additional reading at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org. OTC 25391 A Review of Intelligent- Completions Installations: Lessons Learned From Electric/Hydraulic, Hydraulic, and All-Electric Systems by Maciel Potiani, Baker Hughes, et al. SPE 169388 Generating Synthetic Well Logs by Artificial Neural Networks Using MISO-ARMAX Model in Cupiagua Field by G.A. Alzate, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, et al. SPE 170113 An Integrated Application of Cluster Analysis and Artificial Neural Networks for SAGD-Recovery- Performance Prediction in Heterogeneous Reservoirs by Amirian Ehsan, University of Alberta, 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.288
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.

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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