MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280646467 · doi:10.3390/en15103675

Well-Logging-Based Lithology Classification Using Machine Learning Methods for High-Quality Reservoir Identification: A Case Study of Baikouquan Formation in Mahu Area of Junggar Basin, NW China

2022· article· en· W4280646467 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsRoyal Bank of Canada
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLithologyIdentification (biology)LoggingSupport vector machineRandom forestGeologyEnsemble learningStructural basinReceiver operating characteristicConglomerateComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningData miningPattern recognition (psychology)PetrologyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The identification of underground formation lithology is fundamental in reservoir characterization during petroleum exploration. With the increasing availability and diversity of well-logging data, automated interpretation of well-logging data is in great demand for more efficient and reliable decision making for geologists and geophysicists. This study benchmarked the performances of an array of machine learning models, from linear and nonlinear individual classifiers to ensemble methods, on the task of lithology identification. Cross-validation and Bayesian optimization were utilized to optimize the hyperparameters of different models and performances were evaluated based on the metrics of accuracy—the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), precision, recall, and F1-score. The dataset of the study consists of well-logging data acquired from the Baikouquan formation in the Mahu Sag of the Junggar Basin, China, including 4156 labeled data points with 9 well-logging variables. Results exhibit that ensemble methods (XGBoost and RF) outperform the other two categories of machine learning methods by a material margin. Within the ensemble methods, XGBoost has the best performance, achieving an overall accuracy of 0.882 and AUC of 0.947 in classifying mudstone, sandstone, and sandy conglomerate. Among the three lithology classes, sandy conglomerate, as in the potential reservoirs in the study area, can be best distinguished with accuracy of 97%, precision of 0.888, and recall of 0.969, suggesting the XGBoost model as a strong candidate machine learning model for more efficient and accurate lithology identification and reservoir quantification for geologists.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.281 · 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