1887

Abstract

Summary

In this study, a workflow for seismic lithology and fluid prediction is presented using rock physics based pseudowells and deep learning algorithms. The approach is referred to as ASAP (“Anomaly Screening Applying Pseudowells”) and provides a rapid method for quantitative seismic interpretation and prospect mapping in areas with limited well control. The method extends on conventional AVO classification, where only intercept and gradient information is used, by taking into account the full waveform in the AVO data. Convolutional neural network models are utilized to train and map out latent parameters from the seismic data. The calibration with a discovery well and the application of 240 pseudo-wells allow for an intuitive understanding of the latent space and rapid classification of hydrocarbon filled reservoirs away from well control. Pseudo-wells can be easily updated on-the-fly if alternative rock physics models or additional geological scenarios were to be tested.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901146
2019-06-03
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Avseth, P., Mukerji, T., Joerstad, A., Mavko, G. and Veggeland, T.
    [2001] Seismic reservoir mapping from 3D AVO in a North Sea turbidite system. Geophysics, 66, 1157–1176.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Blei, D.M., Kucukelbir, A. and McAuliffe, J.D.
    [2017] Variational inference: A review for statisticians. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 112(518), 859–877.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Caers, J., Avseth, P. and Mukerji, T.
    [2001] Geostatistical integration of rock physics, seismic amplitudes, and geologic models in North Sea turbidite systems. The Leading Edge, 20(3), 308–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Connolly, P. and Hughes, M.
    [2016] Stochastic inversion by matching to large numbers of pseudo-wells. Geophysics, 81(2), M7–M22.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Eidsvik, J., Avseth, P., Omre, H., Mukerji, T. and Mavko, G.
    [2004] Stochastic reservoir characterization using prestack seismic data. Geophysics, 69(4), 978–993.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Hoffman, M.D., Blei, D.M., Wang, C. and Paisley, J.
    [2013] Stochastic variational inference. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 14(1), 1303–1347.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Kingma, D.P. and Welling, M.
    [2013] Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Maaten, L.v.d. and Hinton, G.
    [2008] Visualizing data using t-SNE. Journal of machine learning research, 9(Nov), 2579–2605.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. McInnes, L. and Healy, J.
    [2018] Umap: Uniform manifold approximation and projection for dimension reduction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.03426.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Shlens, J.
    [2014] A tutorial on principal component analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1404.1100.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901146
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901146
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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