IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/eartha/wsu6g.html

Advanced ML and AI Approaches for Proxy-based Optimization of CO2-Enhanced Oil Recovery in Heterogeneous Clastic Reservoirs

Author

Listed:
  • Al-Mudhafar, Watheq J.

    (Basrah Oil Company)

  • Rao, Dandina N
  • Srinivasan, Sanjay

Abstract

The EOS-compositional reservoir simulation, Design of Experiments, and Proxy Modeling were integrated to obtain the optimal future performance scenario and to construct the most accurate simplified model alternative to the complex reservoir flow simulation. This integrated workflow was adopted on a sector of the main pay/upper sandstone member in the South Rumaila oil field, located in Iraq. After conducting the acceptable history matching, 6 operational decision parameters, which constrain the production and injection activities, were optimized for their optimal level to achieve optimal flow response factor. Given these decision parameters, the Latin Hypercube Sampling was employed as a low-discrepancy and uniform approach to create hundreds of simulation runs (experiments) to construct a proxy-based optimization approach. The optimal cumulative oil production, by the end of the prediction period, led to obtaining 4.6039 MMMSTB of oil production, while the base case of the GAGD process evaluation of default parameters’ setting resulted to obtain 4.3887 MMMSTB of oil production. Finally, four proxy metamodels were constructed to provide simplified models alternative to the complex compositional reservoir simulation: Second-Degree Polynomial Equation (QM), Multivariate Additive Regression Splines (MARS), Fuzzy Logic-Genetic Algorithm (FUzzy-GEnetic), and Generalized Boosted Modeling (GBM). The cross-validation with Adjusted $R^{2}_{adj}$ and Root Mean Square Error were employed to find the optimal proxy model that has the least mismatch between the proxy- and simulator-based cumulative oil production response through CO2-GAGD process. It was concluded that both GBM and FUzzy-GEnetic are the most accurate simplified alternative metamodels for the GAGD Process evaluation and prediction.

Suggested Citation

  • Al-Mudhafar, Watheq J. & Rao, Dandina N & Srinivasan, Sanjay, 2019. "Advanced ML and AI Approaches for Proxy-based Optimization of CO2-Enhanced Oil Recovery in Heterogeneous Clastic Reservoirs," Earth Arxiv wsu6g, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:eartha:wsu6g
    DOI: 10.31223/osf.io/wsu6g
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5dd0b94b5b97bd000e59583c/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31223/osf.io/wsu6g?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    2. Friedman, Jerome H., 2002. "Stochastic gradient boosting," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 367-378, February.
    3. Lenth, Russell V., 2009. "Response-Surface Methods in R, Using rsm," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 32(i07).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mansoor, Umer & Jamal, Arshad & Su, Junbiao & Sze, N.N. & Chen, Anthony, 2023. "Investigating the risk factors of motorcycle crash injury severity in Pakistan: Insights and policy recommendations," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 21-38.
    2. Matthew Smith & Francisco Alvarez, 2022. "Predicting Firm-Level Bankruptcy in the Spanish Economy Using Extreme Gradient Boosting," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 59(1), pages 263-295, January.
    3. Kalouptsidis, N. & Psaraki, V., 2010. "Approximations of choice probabilities in mixed logit models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(2), pages 529-535, January.
    4. Peiró-Signes, Ángel & Segarra-Oña, Marival & Trull-Domínguez, Óscar & Sánchez-Planelles, Joaquín, 2022. "Exposing the ideal combination of endogenous–exogenous drivers for companies’ ecoinnovative orientation: Results from machine-learning methods," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Francisco Javier Amador & Rosa Marina González & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2004. "Preference heterogeneity and willingness to pay for travel time," Documentos de trabajo conjunto ULL-ULPGC 2004-12, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la ULPGC.
    6. Richard Berk, 2019. "Accuracy and Fairness for Juvenile Justice Risk Assessments," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 175-194, March.
    7. Small, Kenneth A & Winston, Clifford & Yan, Jia, 2002. "Uncovering the Distribution of Motorists' Preferences for Travel Time and Reliability: Implications for Road Pricing," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt8zd2r34k, University of California Transportation Center.
    8. Robert Suchting & Michael S. Businelle & Stephen W. Hwang & Nikhil S. Padhye & Yijiong Yang & Diane M. Santa Maria, 2020. "Predicting Daily Sheltering Arrangements among Youth Experiencing Homelessness Using Diary Measurements Collected by Ecological Momentary Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-17, September.
    9. Sándor, Zsolt & Train, Kenneth, 2004. "Quasi-random simulation of discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 313-327, May.
    10. Ylinen, Mika & Ranta, Mikko, 2025. "Predicting corporate innovation using machine learning and social media data," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    11. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    12. Nathan H. Miller, 2008. "Competition When Consumers Value Firm Scope," EAG Discussions Papers 200807, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    13. Bhat, Chandra R., 2011. "The maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) estimation of multinomial probit-based unordered response choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 923-939, August.
    14. David Levinson & Ramachandra Karamalaputi, 2003. "Predicting the Construction of New Highway Links," Working Papers 200305, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
    15. Müller, Daniel & Leitão, Pedro J. & Sikor, Thomas, 2013. "Comparing the determinants of cropland abandonment in Albania and Romania using boosted regression trees," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 66-77.
    16. Bissan Ghaddar & Ignacio Gómez-Casares & Julio González-Díaz & Brais González-Rodríguez & Beatriz Pateiro-López & Sofía Rodríguez-Ballesteros, 2023. "Learning for Spatial Branching: An Algorithm Selection Approach," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 35(5), pages 1024-1043, September.
    17. Huang Lin & Merete Eggesbø & Shyamal Das Peddada, 2022. "Linear and nonlinear correlation estimators unveil undescribed taxa interactions in microbiome data," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    18. Akash Malhotra, 2018. "A hybrid econometric-machine learning approach for relative importance analysis: Prioritizing food policy," Papers 1806.04517, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    19. Somodi, Imelda & Bede-Fazekas, Ákos & Botta-Dukát, Zoltán & Molnár, Zsolt, 2024. "Confidence and consistency in discrimination: A new family of evaluation metrics for potential distribution models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 491(C).
    20. Yuehan Ai & Fan He & Emma Lancaster & Jiyoung Lee, 2022. "Application of machine learning for multi-community COVID-19 outbreak predictions with wastewater surveillance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-12, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:eartha:wsu6g. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://eartharxiv.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.