1887

Abstract

Summary

Gaussian Process models have been proposed as statistical models that allow interpolation between existing data points. One advantage of this approach is that the Gaussian process model includes an estimate of the accuracy of the predicted expected value at any point within the parameter space, unlike direct interpolators often used as proxy models. When used as part of an optimisation process we can use the Gaussian process model to eliminate those areas where we have high confidence that the optimal solution will not be found. This allows the efficient targeting of resources on those areas of parameter space that could yield the optimal solution, and also facilitates a more global analysis of the parameter space. Gaussian Processes naturally provide clear visualisation of the objective surface at various stages of the optimisation, which generates insight into the optimisation process sometimes lacking in alternative approaches, and thus facilitate human validation/intervention if desired.

To understand the theoretical basis of the approach requires a level of statistical knowledge that is not commonly found outside of the statistics community, which may have inhibited uptake. However, the approach can be easily implemented from first principles in python, using a recipe by Rasmussen and Williams, without needing a deep understand of the theoretical underpinning. The recipe has a small number of controls that need to be set by the user. In this paper we construct empirical models of the effect of these controls on the interpolation and explain their limitations from a theoretical perspective. We explore how dynamic adjustment of the controls might be used as part of an optimisation scheme.

We apply our approach to the well placement optimisation problem. The reservoir model used for the exercise is the PUNQ Complex Model, which is a 2.4 million cell representation of a BRENT sequence reservoir. A combination of producers and injectors are sequentially placed in the model using a greedy algorithm with the optimal position at each iteration being selected using the Gaussian Process model as a proxy for the true objective surface. The result is compared to a manually derived solution by an experienced reservoir engineer which required 22 wells. The result obtained by this approach reaches the same level of performance using only 18 wells.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202244028
2022-09-05
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andrianakis, I., Vernon, I., McCreesh, N., McKinley, T., Oakley, J., Nsubuga, R., Goldstein, M. and White, R. [2017] History matching of a complex epidemiological model of human immunodeficiency virus transmission by using variance emulation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 66(4), 717–740.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Barker, J., Cuypers, M. and Holden, L. [2001] Quantifying Uncertainty in Production Forecasts: Another Look at the PUNQ-S3 Problem. SPE Journal, 6, 433–441.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bilionis, I., Zabaras, N., Konomi, B. and Lin, G. [2013] Multi-output separable Gaussian process: Towards an efficient, fully Bayesian paradigm for uncertainty quantification. J Comp Physics, 241, 212–239.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bos, C. [1999] Production Forecasting with Uncertainty Quantification funded by European Union Fourth Framework Hydrocarbon Reservoir Programme.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BRENT [2022] timescalefoundation.org/resources/NW_Europe_Lex/litho/brent.php.
  6. Brochu, E., Cora, V. and Freitas, N. [2022] A Tutorial on Bayesian Optimization of Expensive Cost Functions, with Application to Active User Modeling and Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning. arXiv:1012.2599 [cs.LG].
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Carter, J. and Matthews, J. [2008] Optimization of a reservoir development plan using a parallel genetic algorithm. Petroleum Geoscience, 14, 85–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Christie, M. and Blunt, M. [2001] Tenth SPE Comparative Solution Project: A Comparison of Upscaling Techniques. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 4, 308–317.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cuypers, M., Dubrule, O., Lamy, P. and Bissell, R. [1998] Optimal choice of inversion parameters for history matching with the pilot method. In: proc 6th European conference on the mathematics of oil recovery.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Floris, F., Bush, M., Cuypers, M., Roggero, F. and Syversveen, A.R. [2001] Methods for quantifying the uncertainty of production forecasts: a comparative study. Petroleum Geoscience, 7, S87–S96.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Rasmussen, C. and Williams, C. [2006] Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Santner, T., williams, B. and Notz, W. [2003] The Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments. New York: Springer-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Stien, M. [1999] Interpolation of spatial data. Springer-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Vernon, I., Goldstein, M. and Bower, R. [2010a] Rejoinder - Galaxy Formation: a Bayesian Uncertainty Analysis. Bayesian Analysis, 05(04), 697–708.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Vernon, I., Goldstein, M. and Bower, R. [2014] Galaxy Formation: Bayesian History Matching for the Observable Universe. Statistical Science, 29(1), 81–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Vernon, I., Goldstein, M. and Bower, R.G. [2010b] Galaxy Formation: a Bayesian Uncertainty Analysis. Bayesian Analysis, 05(04), 619–670.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Vernon, I., Liu, J., Goldstein, M., Rowe, J., Topping, J. and Lindsey, K. [2018] Bayesian uncertainty analysis for complex systems biology models: emulation, global parameter searches and evaluation of gene functions. BMC Systems Biology, 12, 1.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Vernon, I., Owen, J., and Carter, J. [2022] Bayesian Emulation for Computer Models with Structured Partial Discontinuities. in preparation.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202244028
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202244028
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