We present a new approach for estimating reservoir models consistent with multiple data types and constraints, by combining geostatistical simulation with a multi-objective stochastic optimization method. Our approach starts by generating an ensemble of initial reservoir models using geostatistical simulation techniques. We then compute the corresponding model responses (seismic etc.) using the appropriate forward modeling operators, compare the simulated responses with the real data, and iterate to obtain the best match. Since each geological and geophysical data set has its own strengths and weaknesses, realistic models are best obtained by simultaneously matching all of the multiple data constraints. The main advantage of our approach is that we can define multiple objective functions for a variety of data types and constraints, and simultaneously minimize the mismatches. Using our approach, the resulting models converge to a Pareto front, which represents the set of best compromise model solutions for the defined objectives. We test our new approach on a 3D object-oriented reservoir model, where variogram-based simulation techniques typically fail to reproduce realistic models. Our results indicate that improved reservoir property models and flow-unit connectivity can be obtained with this new multi-objective optimization approach.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. DerfoulR., Da VeigaS. GoutC. and Le GuyaderC.
    , 2012. New formulation of the objective function for better incorporation of 4D seismic data into reservoir model, 13th European conference on the mathematics of oil recovery, Biarritz, France, Sep.10–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Doyen, P.M.
    , 2007, Seismic Reservoir Characterization, an Earth Modelling Perspective, European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Dupin, M., Baroni, G., Da Veiga, S.
    , 2011. Preselection of reservoir models from a geostatistics-based petrophysical seismic inversion, SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering, October, 612–620.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Emami Niri, M. and Lumley, D.
    2013 (1). Initialising dynamic reservoir models for history matching using pre-production 3D seismic data. Paper IPTC 16650, 6th International Petroleum Technology Conference, Beijing, China, Mar.26–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 2013 (2). A multiobjective stochastic optimization approach for reservoir model estimation. 23rd International Geophysical Conference and Exhibition (ASEG-PESA 2013), Melbourne-Australia, Oct, 11–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Lumley, D. E. & Behrens, R. A.
    , 1998, Practical issues of 4D seismic reservoir monitoring: What an engineer needs to know, SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering Journal.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Saussus, D. and Sams, M.
    2012. Facies as the key to using seismic inversion for modelling reservoir properties. first break, 30 (7), 45–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. SinghV.P., DequetB. LegerM. SchoenauerM.
    , 2008. Automatic wave-equation migration velocity inversion using multiobjective evolutionary algorithm, Geophysics, 73, No.5, VE61–VE73.
    [Google Scholar]

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