MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199645533 · doi:10.1142/s0218348x2150256x

A NOVEL APPROACH BASED ON FEATURE FUSION FOR FRACTURE IDENTIFICATION USING WELL LOG DATA

2021· article· en· W3199645533 on OpenAlexaff
Tianyang Li, Nian Yu, Zizhen Wang, Ruihe Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueFractals · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFracture (geology)Identification (biology)FractalFeature (linguistics)BoreholeStability (learning theory)GeologyPoint (geometry)Data miningPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsGeotechnical engineeringMachine learningGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate identification of fractures is necessary and complex for carbonate reservoir exploration. Using conventional well logs and geological data, we identify various fracture identification methods based on depth point information and waveform processing. The results show that the method based on equivalent medium theory maintains high stability and accuracy in reflecting the secondary pores in cases of unfavorable borehole environments. Both the acoustic log and dual lateral difference fractal dimensions increase in line with the degree of fracture development. The high-frequency energy information shows significantly high values in the fractured zone on a suitable scale. Finally, the fractures are characterized by a novel approach based on feature fusion. The linear predictive relationship for fracture identification via proposed comprehensive factor scores (CFS) avoids the influence of the deviation of a few variables on the stability of the overall results. Our study offers a new framework for fracture identification in the exploration and evaluation of carbonate 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFractalsSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207