A Bayesian multivariate model using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo inference to estimate total organic carbon content in shale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The prediction of total organic carbon (TOC) content using geophysical logs is one of the key steps in shale reservoir characterization. Various empirical relations have previously been used for the estimation of TOC content from well-logs; however, uncertainty quantification in the model estimation is often ignored while performing TOC estimation in a deterministic framework. We introduce the problem of TOC estimation in a Bayesian setting with the goal of enhancing the TOC content prediction together with the quantification of the uncertainty in the model prediction. To signify the uncertainty, we draw random samples of model parameters from the posterior distribution by realizing multidimensional stochastic processes within the Hamiltonian Monte Carlo algorithm. The posterior model for the variables that influence TOC estimation is conditioned on the available well-log observations and is further defined by a priori and likelihood distributions. We demonstrate examples of applications of this approach to estimate the TOC content on two real field data sets from the well-known Devonian Duvernay shale of Western Canada and the Silurian shale of the Ahnet Basin. The accuracy in the estimation is arbitrated by comparing the prediction results with those obtained using the two most widely used empirical models. Corroborating the results by the laboratory-measured TOC contents demonstrate that the Bayesian approach offers a more reliable and better confidence in predictions when compared with the empirical models, as it provides additional information on the prediction uncertainty. Finally, the implications of the present approach are derived in terms of depositional environments to characterize the high TOC content zone in the studied organic shale formations.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".