MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285493960 · doi:10.1190/geo2021-0747.1

Petrophysical inversion based on <i>f-s-r</i> amplitude-variation-with-offset linearization and canonical correlation analysis

2022· article· en· W4285493960 on OpenAlexaff
Darío Graña, Brian Russell, Tapan Mukerji

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsShell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrophysicsSeismic inversionAmplitude versus offsetLinearizationGeologyInversion (geology)Synthetic dataAmplitudeMathematicsAlgorithmPorosityGeotechnical engineeringNonlinear systemSeismologyGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The prediction of petrophysical properties, such as porosity and rock-fluid volumes, from partially stacked seismic data typically requires a rock-physics model that often is lithology dependent and difficult to calibrate. We adopt canonical correlation analysis (CCA) to infer the underlying relation between petrophysical properties and elastic attributes estimated from seismic data. We develop a two-step inversion approach: first, we predict elastic properties from partially stacked seismic data using a Bayesian linear inverse method based on an amplitude-variation-with-offset (AVO) linearization in terms of fluid, rigidity, and density factors, and then we predict petrophysical properties from the estimated AVO attributes using CCA. The novelty of our approach is the application of CCA to the fluid and rigidity factors, which avoids the calibration of an explicit rock-physics model by automatically deriving a linear relation in the lower dimensional space of the canonical variables. The parameterization of the linearization in terms of fluid, rigidity, and density factors maximizes the correlation with respect to the petrophysical properties of interest. Furthermore, the probabilistic approach is extended to the petrophysical inversion using Bayesian linear theory and the posterior distribution of petrophysical properties conditioned by seismic data is computed by combining the probability distributions obtained from seismic and petrophysical inversion to propagate the uncertainty from the seismic to the petrophysical domain. The inversion is validated on a synthetic case that finds high accuracy of our formulation. A case study with synthetic and real partially stacked seismic data also is presented and compared to a traditional inversion with an explicit rock-physics model.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207