MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240130190 · doi:10.2118/170027-ms

An Integrated Approach to Building History-Matched Geomodels to Understand Complex Long Lake Oil Sands Reservoirs, Part 1: Geomodeling

2014· article· en· W4240130190 on OpenAlexaff
Xingquan Kevin Zhang, Seyed Ali Feizabadi, Peter Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Heavy Oil Conference-Canada · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySedimentary depositional environmentPetrophysicsReservoir modelingDeposition (geology)Channel (broadcasting)Petroleum engineeringFluvialOil in placeEconomic geologyOil shalePetrologyHydrogeologyGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringPaleontologyPetroleumStructural basinComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract At the Nexen Long Lake in situ steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) oil sands recovery project, the bitumen-saturated reservoir is in the Lower Cretaceous McMurray Formation. The main depositional environment in the reservoir unit is fluvial-estuarine meandering channels. Stacked channel deposition exhibits a high degree of variability both vertically and laterally over short distances and depositional complexity occurs at many scales. Many papers have been written on characterizing oil sands deposition geologically or geostatistically. However, complete characterization cannot be achieved at all scales due to the degree of complexity. Building a history-matched geomodel can be very time consuming and very challenging in complex reservoirs such as in Long Lake, where the Quaternary (Gregoire) Channel, collapse features, top gas and top water, lean zones, as well as shale barriers and baffles, contribute to the complexity. This paper presents a practical geological modeling approach used at Nexen to quantify uncertainties of reservoir properties. This approach has been validated by history matching and prediction. The solution is based on the integration of all available geology, geophysics, petrophysics, reservoir engineering, and production information. Using the proposed solution, the number of modeling iterations and the time required to achieve the desired objectives of history matching and prediction have been significantly reduced.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Heavy Oil Conference-CanadaSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207