MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946160554 · doi:10.2118/0519-0065-jpt

Machine Learning Optimizes Duvernay Shale-Well Performance

2019· article· en· W2946160554 on OpenAlex
Judy Feder

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverfittingArtificial neural networkVariable (mathematics)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceReservoir computingComputer scienceVariablesLinear regressionRegressionStatisticsMathematicsRecurrent neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Judy Feder, contains highlights of paper SPE 189823, “Machine Learning Applied To Optimize Duvernay Well Performance,” by Braden Bowie, SPE, Apache, prepared for the 2018 SPE Canada Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, 13–14 March. The paper has not been peer reviewed. This paper discusses how machine learning by use of multiple linear regression and a neural network was used to optimize completions and well designs in the Duvernay shale. The methodology revealed solutions that could save more than $1 million per well and potentially deliver an improvement in well performance of greater than 50%. The work flow described rigorously analyzes the relationships between a significant number of well-completion variables, predicts results, and performs optimizations for ideal outcomes. The work flow is not Duvernay-specific and can be applied to other basins and formations. Introduction A fundamental problem for machine learning in many industries is that a responding variable is controlled not by one but by a number of predictor variables. Inferring the relationship between the responding variable and the predictor variables is of key importance. Interactions between predictor variables and noise in the data complicate matters further. This problem can be solved with multiple linear regression or a neural network, both of which use all of the predictor variables together. However, care must be taken to obtain a model that is truly predictive and not merely a result of overfitting the data. In unconventional oil and gas reservoirs, well performance generally is characterized either at the well level by detailed technical work such as rate-transient analysis, microseismic, and other techniques or at the field level by statistical methods with ranges for production performance. Refinement of this statistical interpretation generally involves normalizing for only one or two key parameters, such as lateral length or tonnage. Additionally, wells usually are grouped or excluded entirely from the population for various reasons, such as substandard completion design. This introduces bias in the selected wells and reduces the sample size. As a result, this approach is limited to the key variables identified and the bias introduced by the well population selected. The idea of using a neural network has been executed successfully in the past to optimize completions. However, data sets were limited. Recently, the use of machine learning has grown substantially by integrating more variables in the analysis, which reduces reservoir uncertainty. The goal of the work flow described in the complete paper is to improve on previous methodology by rigorously and statistically refining estimates for well performance without excluding wells and to recommend which variables are and are not influencing well performance. The goal was accomplished through machine learning in the form of a multiple linear regression and a neural network, comparing the results from both.

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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.175 · 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