1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Petroleum Geoscience
  4. Volume 24, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 24, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1354-0793
  • E-ISSN:

Abstract

Effective fusion of multiple data, including geographical, geological, geophysical, geochemical and dynamic data for hydrocarbon potential mapping, involves both a fusion algorithm and a convenient modelling platform. In this study, fuzzy logic and a geographical information system (GIS) are used to fuse geological and geophysical interpretations in mapping the gas potential of the Kazakhstan Marsel Territory Carboniferous system based on the assumed gas-accumulation model. Non-linear membership functions are used to transform the input data, while the gamma operator is used to combine the multiple datasets. Finally, the Carboniferous system targets, the Visean (Cv) and Serpukhovian (Csr) units, are mapped. Gas testing validated our results.

© 2018 The Author(s)
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2016-100
2017-05-09
2024-04-26

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2016-100
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. An, P., Moon, W.M. & Rencz, A.
    1991. Application of fuzzy set theory to integrated mineral exploration. Canadian Journal of Exploration Geophysics, 1, 1–11.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Arab Amiri, M., Karimi, M. & Alimohammadi Sarab, A.
    2015. Hydrocarbon resources potential mapping using the evidential belief functions and GIS, Ahvaz/Khuzestan Province. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 8, 3929–3941.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Arslan, A. & Kaya, M.
    2001. Determination of fuzzy logic membership functions using genetic algorithms. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 118, 297–306.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Balasubramaniam, P. & Ananthi, V.P.
    2014. Image fusion using intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Information Fusion, 20, 21–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Belt, K. & Paxton, S.T.
    2005. GIS as an aid to visualizing and mapping geology and rock properties in regions of subtle topography. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 1–2, 149–160.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bertagne, A., Nagihara, S.S. & Arbo, R.
    2000. GIS applications in the exploration-production cycle, Examples from the Gulf of Mexico. The Leading Edge, 2, 184–192.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bigand, A. & Colot, O.
    2016. Membership function construction for interval-valued fuzzy sets with application to Gaussian noise reduction. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 286, 66–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bilgiç, T. & Türkşen, I.B.
    1999. Chapter 3: Measurement of membership functions: theoretical and empirical work. In: Dubois, D. & Prade, H. (eds) Handbooks of Fuzzy Sets and System, Fundamentals of Fuzzy Sets, Volume 1. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 195–227.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bingham, L., Zurita-Milla, R. & Escalona, A.
    2012. Geographic information system-based fuzzy-logic analysis for petroleum exploration with a case study of northern South America. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 11, 2121–2142.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Brown, W., Groves, D. & Gedeon, T.
    2003. Use of fuzzy membership input layers to combine subjective geological knowledge and empirical data in a neural network method for mineral-potential mapping. Natural Resources Research, 3, 183–200.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Civanlar, M.R. & Trussell, H.J.
    1986. Constructing membership functions using statistical data. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 18, 1–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Demicco, R.V., Klir, G.J. & Belohlavek, R.
    2003. The role of fuzzy logic in sedimentology and stratigraphic models. In: Nikravesh, M., Aminzadeh, F. & Zadeh, L.A. (eds) Soft Computing and Intelligent Data Analysis in Oil Exploration. Developments in Petroleum Science, 51. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 189–217.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. de Tré, de T. & de Caluwe, R.
    2003. Level-2 fuzzy sets and their usefulness in object-oriented database modelling. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 140, 29–49.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Evangelos, T.
    2000. Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods. A Comparative Study. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Goguen, J.A.
    1967. L-fuzzy sets. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 18, 145–174.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Grauel, A. & Ludwig, L.A.
    1999. Construction of differentiable membership functions. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 101, 219–225.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Halgamuge, S.K., Poechmueller, W. & Glesner, M.
    1995. An alternative approach for generation of membership functions and fuzzy rules based on radial and cubic basis function networks. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 12, 279–298.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Jang, J.S.R., Sun, C.T. & Mizutani, E.
    1997. Neuro-Fuzzy and Soft Computing, A Computational Approach to Learning and Machine Intelligence. MATLAB Curriculum Series. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Karnik, N.N., Mendel, J.M. & Liang, Q.
    1999. Type-2 fuzzy logic systems. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 7, 643–658.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Khaleghi, B., Khamis, A., Karray, F.O. & Razavi, S.N.
    2013. Multisensor data fusion, a review of the state-of-the-art. Information Fusion, 14, 28–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Klir, G.J.
    2004. Fuzzy logic: a specialized tutorial. In: Demicco, R.V. & Klir, G.J. (eds) Fuzzy Logic in Geology. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 11–61.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Knepel, M.N. & Vysotskiy, V.I.
    2010. Current status and development trends of petroleum in Turkmenistan and other central Asian countries, M., ОАО. Vniizarubezhgeologia, 286[in Russian].
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Kumar, C.A., Veldi, R.B., Amulotu, M., Pavanaguru, R. & Chaki, A.
    2015. The role of GIS in spatial modeling of multi-disciplinary geoscientific data for uranium exploration over the Kunjar-Darjing Basin, Odisha. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 85, 657–672.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Liu, X., Zhong, G., Yin, J., He, Y. & Li, X.
    2008. GIS-based modeling of secondary hydrocarbon migration pathways and its application in the northern Songliao Basin, northeast China. Computers & Geosciences, 34, 1115–1126.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Magalhães, L.A. & Souza Filho, C.R.
    2012. Targeting of gold deposits in Amazonian exploration frontiers using knowledge- and data-driven spatial modeling of geophysical, geochemical, and geological data. Surveys in Geophysics, 33, 211–241.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Maroufi Naghadehi, K., Hezarkhani, A. & Honarpazhouh, J.
    2014. Integration multisource data for mineral exploration by using fuzzy logic, case study: Taknar deposit, NE of Iran. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 7, 3227–3241, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-013-0902-9
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Medaglia, A.L., Fang, S.-C., Nuttle, H.L.W. & Wilson, J.R.
    2002. An efficient and flexible mechanism for constructing membership functions. European Journal of Operational Research, 139, 84–95.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Moon, W.M.
    1998. Integration and fusion of geological exploration data: a theoretical review of fuzzy logic approach. Geoscience Journal, 4, 175–183.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Nikravesh, M. & Aminzadeh, F.
    2001. Mining and fusion of petroleum data with fuzzy logic and neural network agents. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 29, 221–238.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Palacios, A.M., Palacios, J.L., Sánchez, L. & Alcacá-Fdez, J.
    2015. Genetic learning of the membership functions for mining fuzzy association rules from low quality data. Information Sciences, 295, 358–378.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Pang, X.Q., Huang, H.D. & Lin, C.S.
    2014. Formation, distribution, exploration, and resource/reserve assessment of superimposed continuous gas field in Marsel exploration area, Kazakhstan. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 6, 1012–1056 [in Chinese].
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Pawlowski, R.
    2000. GIS applied to exploration, Caserta Block, Central Apennines, southern Italy. The Leading Edge, 2, 193–196, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1438574
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Porwal, A. & Carranza, E.J.M.
    2015. Introduction to the Special Issue: GIS-based mineral potential modelling and geological data analyses for mineral exploration. Ore Geology Reviews, 71, 477–483.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Porwal, A. & Carranza, E.J.M. & Hale, M.
    2003. Knowledge-driven and data-driven fuzzy models for predictive mineral potential mapping. Natural Resources Research, 1, 1–25.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Pota, M., Esposito, M. & De Pietro, G.
    2013. Transforming probability distributions into membership functions of fuzzy classes: A hypothesis test approach. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 233, 52–73.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Sun, B., Ma, W. & Zhao, H.
    2014. Decision-theoretic rough fuzzy set model and application. Information Sciences, 283, 180–196.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Tsoukalas, L.H. & Uhrig, R.E.
    1997. Fuzzy and Neural Approaches in Engineering. John Wiley, New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Tsoukalas, L.H., Ishii, M. & Mi, Y.
    1997. A neurofuzzy methodology for impedance-based multiphase flow identification. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 10, 545–555.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Wang, S.
    1994. Generating fuzzy membership functions: A monotonic neural network model. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 61, 71–81.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. White, F.E.
    1991. JDL, Data Fusion Lexicon. Technical Panel for C3. F.E. White, San Diego, CA, USA.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Yang, W.J. & Liu, X.J.
    1992. Integration of multi-geoscience data for mineral resources prediction using GIS methodology, Computers. Environment and Urban Systems, 4, 367–374.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Yarus, J.M. & Coburn, T.C.
    2000. Geographic information systems in petroleum exploration and development: an introductory essay. In: Coburn, T.C. & Yarus, J.M. (eds) Geographic Information Systems in Petroleum Exploration and Development. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Computer Applications in Geology, 4, 3–6.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Yusupov, R. & Ivakin, Y.
    2014. Ten years of the International Workshop ‘Information Fusion and Geoinformation Systems’. In: Popovich, V., Claramunt, C., Schrenk, M. & Korolenko, K. (eds) Information Fusion and Geographic Information Systems (IF and GIS 2013). Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, Springer, Berlin, 45–53, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31833-7_3
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Zadeh, L.A.
    1965. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8, 333–353.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Zaidi, F.K., Nazzal, Y. & Ahmed, I.
    2015. Identification of potential artificial groundwater recharge zones in Northwestern Saudi Arabia using GIS and Boolean logic. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 11, 156–169.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Zhu, A-x., Yang, L., Li, B., Qin, C., Pei, T. & Liu, B.
    2010. Construction of membership functions for predictive soil mapping under fuzzy logic. Geoderma, 155, 164–174.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2016-100
Loading
Fuzzy fusion of geological and geophysical data for mapping hydrocarbon potential based on GIS
Petroleum Geoscience 24, 131 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2016-100
/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2016-100
/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2016-100
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error