Conditioning reservoir models to dynamic data - A forward modeling perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conditioning Reservoir Models To Dynamic Data - A Forward Modeling Perspective Sanjay Srinivasan; Sanjay Srinivasan University of Calgary Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Jef Caers Jef Caers Stanford University Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, October 2000. Paper Number: SPE-62941-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/62941-MS Published: October 01 2000 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Srinivasan, Sanjay, and Jef Caers. "Conditioning Reservoir Models To Dynamic Data - A Forward Modeling Perspective." Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, October 2000. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/62941-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search AbstractIn order to predict accurately future production performance, a reservoir model should reflect the actual patterns of permeability connectivity (flow paths and barriers). Information about such patterns of connectivity is carried by flow response data recorded at wells. However, the flow response data are influenced by many factors other than permeability connectivity such as boundary conditions and fluid property variations. This paper presents a neural network-based procedure for filtering the information related to the permeability field in flow response data. The flow response data is modeled as specific multiple point averages of permeability values in the neighborhood of the well. Such multiple point averages allow accounting for the spatial connectivity of the permeability field. The superiority of such multiple point averages over single point permeability averages for representing flow response data is demonstrated over several reservoir examples.The ultimate quest is to integrate the permeability connectivity information contained in the flow response data into the numerical reservoir models. This amounts to ascertain that the permeability numerical models identify the previous multiple point averages. A Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation algorithm is implemented to perform this identification. Alternative equiprobable permeability fields are generated which, in addition to reproducing the production data, conform to a prior model for the spatial variability of the permeability field. The results demonstrate that flow simulation on the simulated permeability fields do indeed match historic well test data accurately. More importantly, future reservoir performance predictions are rendered more accurate.IntroductionSpatial variations exhibited by the reservoir permeability field have an immediate impact on the fluid producing characteristics of the reservoir. The relationship between a reservoir response, say the well pressure pw(u't) at location u' and time t, and the permeability field k(u); u ? Reservoir, is complex and does vary with both location u' and time t. A reservoir simulator maps the permeability field to the observed well response i.e. it represents a transfer function TFw(k(u); u? Reservoir; t) defined as:Equation 1The mapping TFw is unique in that given a permeability field, the response at the wells can be computed uniquely using TFw. If the permeability field is not fully known, it is modeled with a suite of L equi-probable realizations k(u); =1, . . .L. All these realizations represent accurate models of the reservoir if application of the tranfer function TFw would yield a simulated well response close to the observed value:Since flow and future productivity is controlled by the spatial connectivity of permeability in the reservoir, any flow related data such as pw(u't) is particularly valuable for generating accurate reservoir models. Then conditioning to the well-specific TFw-response such as defined in (1) would result in permeability models k(u); u ? Reservoir which would predict more accurately the future reservoir performances corresponding to different transfer functions. The permeability fields k(u) have to be such that they honor well data at their locations and conform to a prior model of spatial variability, for example to a variogram model ?(h) that measures the spatial variability between pairs of locations. In addition the well pressure is honored in that:where TFw is the transfer function (flow simulator) modeling the well response. Keywords: correlation 0, proxy, prediction, reservoir simulation, multiple point average, artificial intelligence, realization, permeability field, template, calibration Subjects: Reservoir Fluid Dynamics, Reservoir Simulation, Formation Evaluation & Management, Flow in porous media, Evaluation of uncertainties, Drillstem/well testing This content is only available via PDF. 2000. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".