Intelligent Kick Warning Model Based on Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the expansion of oil and gas exploration and development to complex oil and gas resource areas such as deep and ultra-deep formation onshore and offshore, the kick is one of the high drilling risks, and timely and accurate early kick detection is increasingly important. Based on the kick generation mechanism, kick characterization parameters are preliminarily selected. According to the characteristics of the data and previous research progress, Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Feedforward Neural Network (FNN), and Long Short-term Memory Neural Network (LSTM) are established using experimental data from Memorial University of Newfoundland. The test results show that the accuracy of the SVM-linear model was 0.968, and the missing alarm and the false alarm rate only was 0.06 and 0.11. Additionally, through the analysis of the kick response time, the lag time of the SVM-linear model was 1.3 s, and the comprehensive equivalent time was 23.13 s, which showed the best performance. The different effects of the model after data transformation are analyzed, the mechanism of the best effect of the SVM model is analyzed, and the changes in the effect of other models including RF are further revealed. The proposed early-warning model warns in advance in historical well logging data, which is expected to provide a fast, efficient, and accurate gas kick warning model for drilling sites.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".