MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946125750 · doi:10.2516/ogst/2019019

Model-based decision analysis applied to petroleum field development and management

2019· article· en· W2946125750 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOil & Gas Science and Technology – Revue d’IFP Energies nouvelles · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade Estadual de CampinasPetrobrasEnergi SimulationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Flexibility (engineering)Field (mathematics)Production (economics)Uncertainty analysisProbabilistic logicMatching (statistics)Set (abstract data type)Data miningReservoir simulationMathematical optimizationIndustrial engineeringOperations researchEngineeringSimulationArtificial intelligencePetroleum engineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work describes a new methodology for integrated decision analysis in the development and management of petroleum fields considering reservoir simulation, risk analysis, history matching, uncertainty reduction, representative models, and production strategy selection under uncertainty. Based on the concept of closed-loop reservoir management, we establish 12 steps to assist engineers in model updating and production optimization under uncertainty. The methodology is applied to UNISIM-I-D, a benchmark case based on the Namorado field in the Campos Basin, Brazil. The results show that the method is suitable for use in practical applications of complex reservoirs in different field stages (development and management). First, uncertainty is characterized in detail and then scenarios are generated using an efficient sampling technique, which reduces the number of evaluations and is suitable for use with numerical reservoir simulation. We then perform multi-objective history-matching procedures, integrating static data (geostatistical realizations generated using reservoir information) and dynamic data (well production and pressure) to reduce uncertainty and thus provide a set of matched models for production forecasts. We select a small set of Representative Models (RMs) for decision risk analysis, integrating reservoir, economic and other uncertainties to base decisions on risk-return techniques. We optimize the production strategies for (1) each individual RM to obtain different specialized solutions for field development and (2) all RMs simultaneously in a probabilistic procedure to obtain a robust strategy. While the second approach ensures the best performance under uncertainty, the first provides valuable insights for the expected value of information and flexibility analyses. Finally, we integrate reservoir and production systems to ensure realistic production forecasts. This methodology uses reservoir simulations, not proxy models, to reliably predict field performance. The proposed methodology is efficient, easy-to-use and compatible with real-time operations, even in complex cases where the computational time is restrictive.

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)0.000
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 score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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