MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204144492 · doi:10.1190/int-2021-0076.1

Prestack Bayesian lithofacies classification technology and application in oil-sand reservoir prediction

2021· article· en· W3204144492 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zongjun Wang, Nan Tian, Hongchao Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueInterpretation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyLithologyReservoir modelingPrestackSpatial distributionProbability distributionBayesian probabilityInversion (geology)Characterization (materials science)Probabilistic logicPetroleum engineeringPetrologyGeomorphologyRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceStatisticsSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The oil-sand reservoirs in the Athabasca region of Canada are estuarine deposits affected by tides. The strata are inclined, and the interlayers are well-developed. Accurate spatial characterization of reservoirs and interlayers is the key for efficient oil-sand development. In this paper, we have used prestack Bayesian lithofacies classification technology to predict the spatial distribution characteristics of reservoirs and interlayers of oil-sand reservoirs. We first use log lithofacies data as a label, select lithofacies sensitive elastic parameters to make a lithofacies classification probability distribution crossplot, and then project the lithofacies-sensitive elastic parameter volumes into the lithofacies classification probability distribution crossplot. Finally, we predict the spatial probability distribution of different lithofacies. Probabilistic characterization can enhance the recognition of transitional lithology and thin layers in the inversion results, reduce the uncertainty in the prediction of reservoirs and interlayers, and significantly improve the prediction accuracy of reservoirs and interlayers. The field application results in the Kinosis study area indicate that the probability volume predicted by this technology can distinguish interlayers greater than 1 m thick and identify interlayers greater than 2 m thick, which meets the technical requirements of oil-sand steam-assisted gravity drainage development.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterpretationSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207