MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220765081 · doi:10.2118/208916-ms

Machine Learning Based Integrated Approach to Estimate Total Organic Carbon in Shale Reservoirs – A Case Study from Duvernay Formation, Alberta Canada

2022· article· en· W4220765081 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gaurav Sharma, Derek Hayes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil shaleGeologySedimentary depositional environmentTotal organic carbonKerogenPetroleum engineeringMineralogySource rockStructural basinGeomorphologyPaleontologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Shale gas reservoirs have become prominent contributors to the world's hydrocarbon resources and production. They exhibit multiple storage mechanisms, two of which are linked to the free and adsorbed gas phase. Since the adsorbed gas may be stored as a denser phase than the free gas, the contribution of the adsorbed phase can be significant. The adsorbed volume is related to the total organic carbon (TOC) and thus, higher TOC can indicate higher hydrocarbon inplace. Furthermore, productivity can be linked to TOC through the potential for overpressure and conversion of kerogen to pore space. However, estimation of the TOC is not a trivial problem, as it depends on geological factors such as depositional environment. In this study, we propose an integrated workflow using concepts of machine learning to estimate TOC. The workflow is divided into 3 sections which are area selection, sub-region categorization, and prediction modeling. Firstly, 3 active exploration and development areas (Kaybob, Pembina, and East shale basin) of the Duvernay Formation are highlighted and the geology of each specific area is analyzed. Thereafter, using the available core data and average properties of the attributes (Gamma Ray, resistivity, density, and distance from mean vitrinite reflectance line), each area is clustered into sub-regions using SVM, logistic regression, and k-means clustering. Finally, using Random Forest prediction, models for each sub-region are developed and ranked with average mean square errors and standard deviations. It is observed that the Kaybob area can be clustered into 2 regions. This observation is supported by the principal component plot (PC1 vs PC2), which shows a dual cloud structure. This is further supported through clustering analysis, which also revealed the same observation. Results of the prediction modeling found random forest as the best predictor, achieving a match wiht the core data with a error less than 10% and in some cases only a 1% deviation. Shale reservoir characterization requires estimation of the key parameters such as TOC. However, it is difficult to estimate TOC with purely physics-based or purely statistical models, as it requires limited specialized data and is impacted by subtle variations in the reservoir. This study suggests that TOC can be accurately estimated by combining geological interpretation and machine learning based algorithms without bearing cost of the specialized data.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis→French-language works237,207→