MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173639754 · doi:10.3390/en14123629

Application of Machine Learning Method of Data-Driven Deep Learning Model to Predict Well Production Rate in the Shale Gas Reservoirs

2021· article· en· W3173639754 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dongkwon Han, Sunil Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaIran Telecommunication Research CenterNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsArtificial neural networkPrincipal component analysisHydraulic fracturingPerceptronHyperparameterComputer scienceMultivariate statisticsOil shaleArtificial intelligencePetroleum engineeringData miningMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reservoir modeling to predict shale reservoir productivity is considerably uncertain and time consuming. Since we need to simulate the physical phenomenon of multi-stage hydraulic fracturing. To overcome these limitations, this paper presents an alternative proxy model based on data-driven deep learning model. Furthermore, this study not only proposes the development process of a proxy model, but also verifies using field data for 1239 horizontal wells from the Montney shale formation in Alberta, Canada. A deep neural network (DNN) based on multi-layer perceptron was applied to predict the cumulative gas production as the dependent variable. The independent variable is largely divided into four types: well information, completion and hydraulic fracturing and production data. It was found that the prediction performance was better when using a principal component with a cumulative contribution of 85% using principal component analysis that extracts important information from multivariate data, and when predicting with a DNN model using 6 variables calculated through variable importance analysis. Hence, to develop a reliable deep learning model, sensitivity analysis of hyperparameters was performed to determine one-hot encoding, dropout, activation function, learning rate, hidden layer number and neuron number. As a result, the best prediction of the mean absolute percentage error of the cumulative gas production improved to at least 0.2% and up to 9.1%. The novel approach of this study can also be applied to other shale formations. Furthermore, a useful guide for economic analysis and future development plans of nearby reservoirs.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations52
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207