MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7081919414 · doi:10.25675/3.04042

Evaluating covariance-based geostatistical methods with bed-scale outcrop statistics conditioning for reproduction of intra-point bar facies architecture, Cretaceous Horseshoe Canyon Formation, Alberta, Canada

2022· other· en· W7081919414 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueColorado State University · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutcropCanyonFaciesData setGeostatisticsReservoir modelingCretaceousHorseshoe (symbol)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geostatistical characterization of petroleum reservoirs typically suffers from problems of sparse data, and modelers often draw key parameters from analogous outcrop, numerical, and experimental studies to improve predictions. While quantitative information (bed-scale statistical distributions) from outcrop studies is available, translating the data from outcrop to models and generating geologically-realistic realizations with available geostatistical algorithms is often problematic. The overarching goal of this thesis is to test the capacity of covariance-based geostatistical methods to reproduce intra-point bar facies architecture while guiding those algorithms with bed-scale outcrop statistics from the Late Cretaceous Horseshoe Canyon Formation in southeastern Alberta. First, general facies architecture reproduction is tested with 2- and 3-facies synthetic and outcrop-based experiments with variable hard data, soft data weight, and soft data reliability. Next, 3-D sector models compare performance of different geostatistical simulation methods: sequential / co-sequential indicator, plurigaussian, and nested truncated gaussian. Findings show that despite integration of outcrop statistics, all conventional covariance-based geostatistical algorithms struggle to reproduce complex facies architecture that is observed in outcrop. Specifically, problems arise with: 1) low-proportion facies and 2) a weak statistical relationship between hard data (measured sections) and soft data (probability models). Nested modeling partially mitigates low-proportion issues and performs better as a result.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueColorado State UniversitySame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207