MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974195150 · doi:10.2118/196190-ms

Waterflooding Optimization under Geological Uncertainties by Using Deep Reinforcement Learning Algorithms

2019· article· en· W2974195150 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationReinforcement learningArtificial neural networkReservoir simulationComputer scienceMathematical optimizationSet (abstract data type)Water cutAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPetroleum engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recently, substantial technical progress has been made to solve complex tasks in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) by incorporating deep neural networks into reinforcement learning (RL). In this paper, four state-of-the-art deep RL algorithms are applied to optimize the net present value (NPV) of waterflooding (WF) under geological uncertainties by adjusting the water injection rate. They include the deep Q-network (DQN), double DQN (DDQN), dueling DDQN, and deep deterministic policy gradient (DDPG). A set of fifty reservoir realizations are generated by using a geostatistical technique to account for the geological uncertainties. It is found that the deep RL algorithms can optimize the WF in a 3-D 3-phase (oil-water-gas) reservoir under geological uncertainties. More specifically, both DQN and particle swarm optimization (PSO) converge to the same highest NPV, whereas the other three deep RL algorithms can find some local optimum NPVs due to the exploration-exploitation problem. DDPG converges faster than PSO and requires the least numerical simulation runs among all deep RL algorithms. The optimum water injection rate determined in the consideration of geological uncertainties not only increases the expected NPV but also reduces its standard deviation. The optimum WF starting time is found to be in the middle of the primary production. In this way, the solution-gas drive is continued and the water-cut is decreased. The production performances are compared under three different water injection scenarios: no-control, reactive-control, and optimum-control. The optimum-control scenario achieves a low water-cut and a stable oil production rate.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.245 · 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