Transfer learning for well logging formation evaluation using similarity weights

Binsen Xu , Zhou Feng , Jun Zhou , Rongbo Shao , Hongliang Wu , Peng Liu , Han Tian , Weizhong Li , Lizhi Xiao
{"title":"Transfer learning for well logging formation evaluation using similarity weights","authors":"Binsen Xu ,&nbsp;Zhou Feng ,&nbsp;Jun Zhou ,&nbsp;Rongbo Shao ,&nbsp;Hongliang Wu ,&nbsp;Peng Liu ,&nbsp;Han Tian ,&nbsp;Weizhong Li ,&nbsp;Lizhi Xiao","doi":"10.1016/j.aiig.2024.100091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Machine learning has been widely applied in well logging formation evaluation studies. However, several challenges negatively impacted the generalization capabilities of machine learning models in practical implementations, such as the mismatch of data domain between training and testing datasets, imbalances among sample categories, and inadequate representation of data model. These issues have led to substantial insufficient identification for reservoir and significant deviations in subsequent evaluations. To improve the transferability of machine learning models within limited sample sets, this study proposes a weight transfer learning framework based on the similarity of the labels. The similarity weighting method includes both hard weights and soft weights. By evaluating the similarity between test and training sets of logging data, the similarity results are used to estimate the weights of training samples, thereby optimizing the model learning process. We develop a double experts' network and a bidirectional gated neural network based on hierarchical attention and multi-head attention (BiGRU-MHSA) for well logs reconstruction and lithofacies classification tasks. Oil field data results for the shale strata in the Gulong area of the Songliao Basin of China indicate that the double experts’ network model performs well in curve reconstruction tasks. However, it may not be effective in lithofacies classification tasks, while BiGRU-MHSA performs well in that area. In the study of constructing large-scale well logging processing and formation interpretation models, it is maybe more beneficial by employing different expert models for combined evaluations. In addition, although the improvement is limited, hard or soft weighting methods is better than unweighted (i.e., average-weighted) in significantly different adjacent wells. The code and data are open and available for subsequent studies on other lithofacies layers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100124,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence in Geosciences","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100091"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial Intelligence in Geosciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666544124000327","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Machine learning has been widely applied in well logging formation evaluation studies. However, several challenges negatively impacted the generalization capabilities of machine learning models in practical implementations, such as the mismatch of data domain between training and testing datasets, imbalances among sample categories, and inadequate representation of data model. These issues have led to substantial insufficient identification for reservoir and significant deviations in subsequent evaluations. To improve the transferability of machine learning models within limited sample sets, this study proposes a weight transfer learning framework based on the similarity of the labels. The similarity weighting method includes both hard weights and soft weights. By evaluating the similarity between test and training sets of logging data, the similarity results are used to estimate the weights of training samples, thereby optimizing the model learning process. We develop a double experts' network and a bidirectional gated neural network based on hierarchical attention and multi-head attention (BiGRU-MHSA) for well logs reconstruction and lithofacies classification tasks. Oil field data results for the shale strata in the Gulong area of the Songliao Basin of China indicate that the double experts’ network model performs well in curve reconstruction tasks. However, it may not be effective in lithofacies classification tasks, while BiGRU-MHSA performs well in that area. In the study of constructing large-scale well logging processing and formation interpretation models, it is maybe more beneficial by employing different expert models for combined evaluations. In addition, although the improvement is limited, hard or soft weighting methods is better than unweighted (i.e., average-weighted) in significantly different adjacent wells. The code and data are open and available for subsequent studies on other lithofacies layers.
利用相似性权重进行测井地层评价的迁移学习
机器学习已被广泛应用于测井地层评估研究。然而,在实际应用中,一些挑战对机器学习模型的泛化能力产生了负面影响,例如训练数据集和测试数据集之间的数据域不匹配、样本类别之间的不平衡以及数据模型的不充分表示。这些问题导致蓄水池的识别能力严重不足,并在后续评估中出现重大偏差。为了提高机器学习模型在有限样本集内的可转移性,本研究提出了一种基于标签相似性的权重转移学习框架。相似性加权方法包括硬加权和软加权。通过评估日志数据的测试集和训练集之间的相似性,利用相似性结果来估计训练样本的权重,从而优化模型学习过程。我们开发了基于分层注意力和多头注意力的双专家网络和双向门控神经网络(BiGRU-MHSA),用于井录重建和岩性分类任务。中国松辽盆地古隆地区页岩地层的油田数据结果表明,双专家网络模型在曲线重建任务中表现良好。但在岩性分类任务中可能效果不佳,而 BiGRU-MHSA 在该领域表现良好。在构建大规模测井处理和地层解释模型的研究中,采用不同的专家模型进行综合评价可能更有益处。此外,虽然改进有限,但在相邻油井差异明显的情况下,硬加权或软加权方法比不加权(即平均加权)方法更好。代码和数据是开放的,可用于其他岩性层的后续研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信