Inference of in situ stress from thermoporoelastic borehole breakouts based on artificial neural network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The determination of in situ stresses is very important in petroleum engineering. Hydraulic fracturing is a widely accepted technique for the determination of in situ stresses nowadays. Unfortunately, the hydraulic fracturing test is time‐consuming and expensive. Taking advantage of the shape of borehole breakouts measured from widely available caliper and image logs to determine in situ stress in petroleum engineering is highly attractive. By finite element modeling of borehole breakouts considering thermoporoelasticity, the authors simulate the process of borehole breakouts in terms of initiation, development, and stabilization under Mogi‐Coulomb criterion and end up with the shape of borehole breakouts. Artificial neural network provides such a tool to establish the relationship between in situ stress and shape of borehole breakouts, which can be used to determine in situ stress based on different shape of borehole breakouts by inverse analysis. In this paper, two steps are taken to determine in situ stress by inverse analysis. First, sets of finite element modeling provide sets of data on in situ stress and borehole breakout measures considering the influence of drilling fluid temperature and pore pressure, which will be used to train an artificial neural network that can eventually represent the relationship between the in situ stress and borehole breakout measures. Second, for a given measure of borehole breakouts in a certain drilling fluid temperature, the trained artificial neural network will be used to predict the corresponding in situ stress. Results of numerical experiments show that the inverse analysis based on finite element modeling of borehole breakouts and artificial neural network is a promising method to determine in situ stress.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".