压裂应用中预测机器学习模型的优化算法选择

AbdulMuqtadir Khan
{"title":"压裂应用中预测机器学习模型的优化算法选择","authors":"AbdulMuqtadir Khan","doi":"10.2118/205642-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n With the advancement in machine learning (ML) applications, some recent research has been conducted to optimize fracturing treatments. There are a variety of models available using various objective functions for optimization and different mathematical techniques. There is a need to extend the ML techniques to optimize the choice of algorithm.\n For fracturing treatment design, the literature for comparative algorithm performance is sparse. The research predominantly shows that compared to the most commonly used regressors and classifiers, some sort of boosting technique consistently outperforms on model testing and prediction accuracy. A database was constructed for a heterogeneous reservoir. Four widely used boosting algorithms were used on the database to predict the design only from the output of a short injection/falloff test.\n Feature importance analysis was done on eight output parameters from the falloff analysis, and six were finalized for the model construction. The outputs selected for prediction were fracturing fluid efficiency, proppant mass, maximum proppant concentration, and injection rate. Extreme gradient boost (XGBoost), categorical boost (CatBoost), adaptive boost (AdaBoost), and light gradient boosting machine (LGBM) were the algorithms finalized for the comparative study. The sensitivity was done for a different number of classes (four, five, and six) to establish a balance between accuracy and prediction granularity. The results showed that the best algorithm choice was between XGBoost and CatBoost for the predicted parameters under certain model construction conditions. The accuracy for all outputs for the holdout sets varied between 80 and 92%, showing robust significance for a wider utilization of these models.\n Data science has contributed to various oil and gas industry domains and has tremendous applications in the stimulation domain. The research and review conducted in this paper add a valuable resource for the user to build digital databases and use the appropriate algorithm without much trial and error. Implementing this model reduced the complexity of the proppant fracturing treatment redesign process, enhanced operational efficiency, and reduced fracture damage by eliminating minifrac steps with crosslinked gel.","PeriodicalId":10970,"journal":{"name":"Day 1 Tue, October 12, 2021","volume":"494 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Boosting Algorithm Choice in Predictive Machine Learning Models for Fracturing Applications\",\"authors\":\"AbdulMuqtadir Khan\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/205642-ms\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n With the advancement in machine learning (ML) applications, some recent research has been conducted to optimize fracturing treatments. There are a variety of models available using various objective functions for optimization and different mathematical techniques. There is a need to extend the ML techniques to optimize the choice of algorithm.\\n For fracturing treatment design, the literature for comparative algorithm performance is sparse. The research predominantly shows that compared to the most commonly used regressors and classifiers, some sort of boosting technique consistently outperforms on model testing and prediction accuracy. A database was constructed for a heterogeneous reservoir. Four widely used boosting algorithms were used on the database to predict the design only from the output of a short injection/falloff test.\\n Feature importance analysis was done on eight output parameters from the falloff analysis, and six were finalized for the model construction. The outputs selected for prediction were fracturing fluid efficiency, proppant mass, maximum proppant concentration, and injection rate. Extreme gradient boost (XGBoost), categorical boost (CatBoost), adaptive boost (AdaBoost), and light gradient boosting machine (LGBM) were the algorithms finalized for the comparative study. The sensitivity was done for a different number of classes (four, five, and six) to establish a balance between accuracy and prediction granularity. The results showed that the best algorithm choice was between XGBoost and CatBoost for the predicted parameters under certain model construction conditions. The accuracy for all outputs for the holdout sets varied between 80 and 92%, showing robust significance for a wider utilization of these models.\\n Data science has contributed to various oil and gas industry domains and has tremendous applications in the stimulation domain. The research and review conducted in this paper add a valuable resource for the user to build digital databases and use the appropriate algorithm without much trial and error. Implementing this model reduced the complexity of the proppant fracturing treatment redesign process, enhanced operational efficiency, and reduced fracture damage by eliminating minifrac steps with crosslinked gel.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10970,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Day 1 Tue, October 12, 2021\",\"volume\":\"494 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Day 1 Tue, October 12, 2021\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/205642-ms\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 1 Tue, October 12, 2021","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/205642-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

随着机器学习(ML)应用的进步,最近进行了一些优化压裂处理的研究。有各种各样可用的模型,使用各种目标函数进行优化和不同的数学技术。有必要扩展机器学习技术来优化算法的选择。对于压裂设计,比较算法性能的文献很少。研究主要表明,与最常用的回归器和分类器相比,某种增强技术在模型测试和预测准确性方面始终优于其他技术。以某非均质油藏为对象,建立了数据库。在数据库上使用了四种广泛使用的增强算法,仅从短注入/衰减测试的输出来预测设计。对衰减分析的8个输出参数进行特征重要性分析,并最终确定6个参数用于模型构建。选择用于预测的产出是压裂液效率、支撑剂质量、最大支撑剂浓度和注入速率。最终确定了极端梯度增强(XGBoost)、分类增强(CatBoost)、自适应增强(AdaBoost)和光梯度增强机(LGBM)算法进行比较研究。对不同数量的类别(四、五和六)进行灵敏度测试,以在准确性和预测粒度之间建立平衡。结果表明,在一定的模型构建条件下,XGBoost和CatBoost是预测参数的最佳算法选择。保留集的所有输出的准确性在80%到92%之间变化,对这些模型的更广泛使用显示出强大的意义。数据科学为油气行业的各个领域做出了贡献,在增产领域有着巨大的应用。本文的研究和综述为用户建立数字数据库和使用适当的算法增加了宝贵的资源,而不需要太多的尝试和错误。采用该模型降低了支撑剂压裂重新设计过程的复杂性,提高了作业效率,并通过消除交联凝胶的微小压裂步骤减少了裂缝损伤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Boosting Algorithm Choice in Predictive Machine Learning Models for Fracturing Applications
With the advancement in machine learning (ML) applications, some recent research has been conducted to optimize fracturing treatments. There are a variety of models available using various objective functions for optimization and different mathematical techniques. There is a need to extend the ML techniques to optimize the choice of algorithm. For fracturing treatment design, the literature for comparative algorithm performance is sparse. The research predominantly shows that compared to the most commonly used regressors and classifiers, some sort of boosting technique consistently outperforms on model testing and prediction accuracy. A database was constructed for a heterogeneous reservoir. Four widely used boosting algorithms were used on the database to predict the design only from the output of a short injection/falloff test. Feature importance analysis was done on eight output parameters from the falloff analysis, and six were finalized for the model construction. The outputs selected for prediction were fracturing fluid efficiency, proppant mass, maximum proppant concentration, and injection rate. Extreme gradient boost (XGBoost), categorical boost (CatBoost), adaptive boost (AdaBoost), and light gradient boosting machine (LGBM) were the algorithms finalized for the comparative study. The sensitivity was done for a different number of classes (four, five, and six) to establish a balance between accuracy and prediction granularity. The results showed that the best algorithm choice was between XGBoost and CatBoost for the predicted parameters under certain model construction conditions. The accuracy for all outputs for the holdout sets varied between 80 and 92%, showing robust significance for a wider utilization of these models. Data science has contributed to various oil and gas industry domains and has tremendous applications in the stimulation domain. The research and review conducted in this paper add a valuable resource for the user to build digital databases and use the appropriate algorithm without much trial and error. Implementing this model reduced the complexity of the proppant fracturing treatment redesign process, enhanced operational efficiency, and reduced fracture damage by eliminating minifrac steps with crosslinked gel.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Successful Application of Managed Pressure Drilling and Cementing in Naturally Fractured Carbonates Environment of Prohorovskoe Exploration Well The Use of Induction Heating in Assessing the Technical Condition and Operating Intervals in Producing Wells A 3-Step Reaction Model For Numerical Simulation of In-Situ Combustion An Example of Building a Petrophysical Model of Unconsolidated Gas-Saturated Laminated Sediments Using Advanced Wireline and Logging While Drilling Services New method for Handling of Infrastructural Constraints for Integrated Modeling in Steady Case
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1