Deciphering Seismogenic Patterns in Hydraulic Fracturing: A Machine Learning Approach in the Southern Montney Play
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The burgeoning development of hydraulic fracturing (HF) for unconventional resource extraction has been paralleled by a rise in injection-induced earthquakes (IIEs), posing significant seismic hazards. A critical challenge in mitigating these hazards is the accurate assessment of the seismogenic potential and earthquake productivity of individual HF pads. We addresses this challenge by analyzing over 35,000 earthquakes in the Southern Montney Play (SMP), Western Canada, from 2014 to 2022, and associating them with 357 HF pads. We employed the eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) machine-learning algorithm, integrating fifteen geological and operational factors to evaluate their influence on IIE occurrence and intensity. We also utilized Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) values for a nuanced interpretation of the model outputs, providing insights into the relative importance and interaction of these factors. Our analysis reveals that the cumulative injected volume and the location of HF pads within the Fort St. John Graben (FSJG) are the primary determinants of seimogenic potential (occurrence of IIE). In contrast, the number of HF stages targeting the Lower Middle Montney formation, cumulative volume from preceding injections, and the HF pad's location within the FSJG predominantly influence the seismogenic productivity (number of IIE). These findings suggest that both operational and geological factors are critical in determining the seismogenic productivity of HF pads. The XGBoost model demonstrated high predictive accuracy (R2 ~0.90), although its performance is constrained by the dataset's size and potential overfitting issues. The study challenges the conventional understanding that proximity to known faults is a major factor in IIE occurrence, instead highlighting the significance of cumulative injection volumes and specific geological settings. The analysis also underscores the complex interplay between various factors, such as the correlation between the location fo the HF pads and the targed formation during HF stimulations, which may influence seismogenic patterns. Overall, our result provides a comprehensive assessment of the factors influencing seismogenic behavior in HF-related IIEs, paving the way for more accurate forecasting of IIE activity levels for individual HF pads in the SMP. The findings have significant implications for seismic hazard assessment and risk mitigation strategies in regions undergoing HF operations. The application of machine learning in this context not only enhances our understanding of induced seismicity but also demonstrates the potential of such techniques in addressing complex geoscientific challenges.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".