A Systematic Review of Big Data Analytics for Oil and Gas Industry 4.0
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Big data (BD) analytics is one of the critical components in the digitalization of the oil and gas (O&G) industry. Its focus is managing and processing a high volume of data to improve operational efficiency, enhance decision making and mitigate risks in the workplace. Enhanced processing of seismic data also provides the industry with a better understanding of BD applications. However, the industry still exercises caution in adopting new technologies. The slow pace of technology adoption can be attributed to various causes, from the obstacles to the integration with existing systems, to cybersecurity for defending the BD system against cyber attacks. In some applications using wearable devices, physiological and location-tracking data also causes concerns related to workplace privacy implications. These shortcomings give rise to uncertainties about the practical benefits and effectiveness of applying BD in O&G activities. The objective of this paper is to perform a systematic review of BD analytics within the context of the O&G industry. This paper attempts to evaluate technical and nontechnical factors affecting the adoption of BD technologies. The study includes BD development platforms, network architecture, data privacy implications, cybersecurity, and the opportunities and challenges of adopting BD technologies in the O&G industry.
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 | 0.010 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".