The Value of Seismic Data in Conventional and Unconventional Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The paper illustrates the value of seismic data in different environments after assessing the benefits and costs of processes such as seismic acquisition, seismic processing and seismic interpretation. Global examples from conventional and unconventional fields are discussed to show how seismic data plays a significant role in determining low-risk and high-reward wells and also eliminating the high-risk and low-reward wells. This paper shows an example of a conventional field in the state of Kansas, USA, where the net present value (NPV) increased by more than 17 times when 3D seismic data was acquired, while in an unconventional field the commercial success rate rose from 30% to 70% due to 3D seismic acquisition. However, two offshore fields in the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago are discussed to show that the NPV as impacted by advanced seismic processing was more than 111 ($M). Another example comes from Viking Field, a conventional field in Canada, where the NPV was increased from 3800 ($M) to 5000 ($M) when the seismic data was re-processed. Furthermore, the value of investing in seismic data was investigated and quantified by comparing two synthetically modeled scenarios in Saudi Arabia. Overall, the four examples from North America, Central America and Saudi Arabia illustrate that investment in seismic data has a positive impact on both conventional and unconventional fields. That provides strong evidence to encourage more investments in geophysical technologies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".