Evaluating prior predictions of production and seismic data
- 180 Downloads
It is common in ensemble-based methods of history matching to evaluate the adequacy of the initial ensemble of models through visual comparison between actual observations and data predictions prior to data assimilation. If the model is appropriate, then the observed data should look plausible when compared to the distribution of realizations of simulated data. The principle of data coverage alone is, however, not an effective method for model criticism, as coverage can often be obtained by increasing the variability in a single model parameter. In this paper, we propose a methodology for determining the suitability of a model before data assimilation, particularly aimed for real cases with large numbers of model parameters, large amounts of data, and correlated observation errors. This model diagnostic is based on an approximation of the Mahalanobis distance between the observations and the ensemble of predictions in high-dimensional spaces. We applied our methodology to two different examples: a Gaussian example which shows that our shrinkage estimate of the covariance matrix is a better discriminator of outliers than the pseudo-inverse and a diagonal approximation of this matrix; and an example using data from the Norne field. In this second test, we used actual production, repeat formation tester, and inverted seismic data to evaluate the suitability of the initial reservoir simulation model and seismic model. Despite the good data coverage, our model diagnostic suggested that model improvement was necessary. After modifying the model, it was validated against the observations and is now ready for history matching to production and seismic data. This shows that the proposed methodology for the evaluation of the adequacy of the model is suitable for large realistic problems.
KeywordsPrior predictive distribution Model criticism Model improvement Mahalanobis distance Production data RFT data Acoustic impedance Seismic inversion Correlated observation error History matching Norne field
The authors thank Equinor (operator of the Norne field) and its license partners Eni Norge and Petoro for the release of the Norne data. The authors acknowledge the Center for Integrated Operations at NTNU for cooperation and coordination of the Norne Cases. The view expressed in this paper are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Equinor and the Norne license partners.
We are grateful to Geovariances for providing a license for the use of Isatis for factorial co-kriging, and to Schlumberger for providing Eclipse and Petrel licenses.
This study is supported by the CIPR/IRIS cooperative research project “4D Seismic History Matching” which is funded by industry partners Eni Norge, Petrobras, and Total, as well as the Research Council of Norway through the Petromaks2 program.
- 2.Alfonzo, M., Oliver, D.S.: Seismic data assimilation with an imperfect model. Computational Geosciences online 10 July. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10596-019-09849-0 (2019)
- 3.Alfonzo, M., Oliver, D.S., MacBeth, C.: Analysis and calibration of 4D seismic data prior to 4D seismic inversion and history matching – Norne Field case. In: 79th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam (2017)Google Scholar
- 4.Amini, H.: A pragmatic approach to simulator-to-seismic modelling for 4D seismic interpretation. Ph.D. thesis, Heriot-Watt University (2014)Google Scholar
- 8.Briceño, A., MacBeth, C., Mangriotis, M.D.: Towards an effective petroelastic model for simulator to seismic studies. In: 78th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2016 (2016)Google Scholar
- 9.Briceño Yañez, A.E.: Calibration and use of the petroelastic model for 4D seismic interpretation. Ph.D. thesis, Heriot-Watt University (2017)Google Scholar
- 15.Ferreira, C.J., Davolio, A., Schiozer, D.J.: Use of a probabilistic and multi-objective history matching for uncertainty reduction for the Norne benchmark case. In: SPE Europec featured at 79th EAGE Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers (2017)Google Scholar
- 18.Härdle, W.K., Simar, L.: Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
- 20.He, J., Tanaka, S., Wen, X.H., Kamath, J.: Rapid S-curve update using ensemble variance analysis with model validation. In: SPE Western Regional Meeting, Bakersfield, California, 23 April. Soc.of Petrol.Engineers (2017)Google Scholar
- 24.Iglewicz, B., Hoaglin, D.C.: How to Detect and Handle Outliers, vol. 16. ASQ Press (1993)Google Scholar
- 25.Kriegel, H.P., Schubert, M., Zimek, A.: Angle-based outlier detection in high-dimensional data. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 444–452. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
- 27.Lee, M.W.: Proposed moduli of dry rock and their application to predicting elastic velocities of sandstones. Tech. Rep. Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5119 US Geological Survey (2005)Google Scholar
- 29.Lorentzen, R., Bhakta, T., Grana, D., Luo, X., Valestrand, R., Naevdal, G.: History matching of real production and seismic data in the Norne field. In: ECMOR XVI (2018)Google Scholar
- 31.Mavko, G., Mukerji, T., Dvorkin, J.: The Rock Physics Handbook: Tools for Seismic Analysis of Porous Media. Cambridge University Press (2009)Google Scholar
- 32.Morell, E.: History Matching of the Norne Field. Master’s thesis, NTNU. Department of Petroleum Engineering and Applied Geophysics, Trondheim (2010)Google Scholar
- 36.Pride, S.R.: Relationships between seismic and hydrological properties. In: Rubin, Y., Hubbard, S.S. (eds.) Hydrogeophysics, pp 253–290. Springer (2005)Google Scholar
- 38.Rwechungura, R.W., Dadashpour, M., Kleppe, J.: Application of particle swarm optimization for parameter estimation integrating production and time lapse seismic data (SPE-146199). In: SPE offshore Europe Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, 6-8 September 2011. Aberdeen (2011)Google Scholar
- 39.Schäfer, J., Strimmer, K.: A shrinkage approach to large-scale covariance matrix estimation and implications for functional genomics. Stat. Appl. Genet. Mol. Biol. 4(1, 32), 1–30 (2005)Google Scholar
- 41.Schulze-Riegert, R., Nwakile, M., Skripkin, S., Willen, Y.: Scalability and performance efficiency of history matching workflows using MCMC and adjoint techniques applied to the Norne North Sea reservoir case study. In: 78th EAGE Conference and Exhibition (2016)Google Scholar
- 44.Verlo, S.B., Hetland, M.: Development of a field case with real production and 4D data from the Norne Field as a benchmark case for future reservoir simulation model testing. Master’s thesis, NTNU. Trondheim (2008)Google Scholar
- 47.Zhang, Y., Leeuwenburgh, O., Carpentier, S., Steeghs, P.: 4D seismic history matching of the Norne field model using ensemble-based methods with distance parameterization. In: IOR 2017–19th European Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery (2017)Google Scholar
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.