MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205237953 · doi:10.1115/omae2021-62785

Research on Kick Detection Model Based on Machine Learning

2021· article· en· W3205237953 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xianzhi Song, Shiming Duan, Zhijun Pei, Zhaopeng Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 10: Petroleum Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupport vector machineWarning systemArtificial neural networkComputer scienceALARMConstant false alarm rateArtificial intelligenceMachine learningLagRandom forestData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With the expansion of oil and gas exploration and the development of complex oil and gas resource areas, the probability of risk is increasing. Kick is one of the high-risk risks of drilling, and timely and accurate early warning is increasingly important. Based on the kick generation mechanism, kick characterization parameters are preliminarily selected. According to the characteristics of the data and previous research progress, Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Fully Connected Neural Network (FNN), and Long Short-term Memory Neural Network (LSTM) are established using experimental data from Memorial University of Newfoundland. The test results show that the accuracy of the SVM-linear model is 0.952, and the missing alarm, the false alarm rate is only 0.064, 0.035. Also, through the analysis of the kick response time, the lag time of the SVM-linear model is 3.6s, and the comprehensive equivalent time is 23.13, which shows the best performance. This paper lays a good foundation for the establishment of an intelligent kick early warning model.

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)0.002
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 10: Petroleum TechnologySame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207