Reservoir permeability estimation in low-permeability reservoirs from diagnostic fracture injection test G-function parameters using neural networks and evolutionary symbolic regression

IF 1
Ore and Energy Resource Geology Pub Date : 2026-04-01 Epub Date: 2026-04-13 DOI:10.1016/j.oreoa.2026.100125
Samuel Nashed, Oluchi Ejehu, Badr Mohamed, Muhammad Abdullah, Norhan Sedki, Rouzbeh Moghanloo
{"title":"Reservoir permeability estimation in low-permeability reservoirs from diagnostic fracture injection test G-function parameters using neural networks and evolutionary symbolic regression","authors":"Samuel Nashed,&nbsp;Oluchi Ejehu,&nbsp;Badr Mohamed,&nbsp;Muhammad Abdullah,&nbsp;Norhan Sedki,&nbsp;Rouzbeh Moghanloo","doi":"10.1016/j.oreoa.2026.100125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A precise characterization of permeability in low-permeability oil and gas fields is a pressing issue in petroleum engineering, a field in which standard well tests are ineffective. Diagnostic Fracture Injection Tests (DFITs) have become important diagnostic characterization tools, but existing after-closure analytical tools have severe limitations, such as sensitivity to closure identification and limited applicability to pseudo-radial flow regimes. Although machine learning uses for DFIT interpretation have been investigated, available literature is mainly based on synthetic data, is less concerned with predicting permeability and more with closure pressure, and lacks rigorous interpretability analysis to be accepted by industry. In this research, a collection of machine learning models, which enable prediction of reservoir permeability given the parameters of DFIT G-functions, is developed and verified on the basis of a large field database comprising 620 tests. Ten algorithms were compared in a systematic fashion, which comprised neural networks, gradient boosting algorithms (CatBoost, XGBoost, LightGBM), regularized linear models, and ensemble algorithms. Multi-Layer Perceptron Regressor was more efficient with R² = 0.9576, RMSE = 0.0357 md, and MAE = 0.0257 md on training data with good generalization on blind validation (155 independent tests: R² = 0.9194, RMSE = 0.0805 md). SHAP analysis established physically significant relationships, with G-time at closure having the most significant negative correlation with permeability. The symbolic regression using genetic programming gave a complementary equation-based model with an R² of 0.9379. The resulting models are much more efficient than traditional analytical methods and offer quick, precise, and interpretable forecasts that can be used to optimize hydraulic fracturing designs and plan field development in challenging reservoir conditions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100993,"journal":{"name":"Ore and Energy Resource Geology","volume":"20 ","pages":"Article 100125"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ore and Energy Resource Geology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666261226000040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A precise characterization of permeability in low-permeability oil and gas fields is a pressing issue in petroleum engineering, a field in which standard well tests are ineffective. Diagnostic Fracture Injection Tests (DFITs) have become important diagnostic characterization tools, but existing after-closure analytical tools have severe limitations, such as sensitivity to closure identification and limited applicability to pseudo-radial flow regimes. Although machine learning uses for DFIT interpretation have been investigated, available literature is mainly based on synthetic data, is less concerned with predicting permeability and more with closure pressure, and lacks rigorous interpretability analysis to be accepted by industry. In this research, a collection of machine learning models, which enable prediction of reservoir permeability given the parameters of DFIT G-functions, is developed and verified on the basis of a large field database comprising 620 tests. Ten algorithms were compared in a systematic fashion, which comprised neural networks, gradient boosting algorithms (CatBoost, XGBoost, LightGBM), regularized linear models, and ensemble algorithms. Multi-Layer Perceptron Regressor was more efficient with R² = 0.9576, RMSE = 0.0357 md, and MAE = 0.0257 md on training data with good generalization on blind validation (155 independent tests: R² = 0.9194, RMSE = 0.0805 md). SHAP analysis established physically significant relationships, with G-time at closure having the most significant negative correlation with permeability. The symbolic regression using genetic programming gave a complementary equation-based model with an R² of 0.9379. The resulting models are much more efficient than traditional analytical methods and offer quick, precise, and interpretable forecasts that can be used to optimize hydraulic fracturing designs and plan field development in challenging reservoir conditions.
基于神经网络和进化符号回归的低渗透油藏诊断注缝试验g函数参数渗透率估算
低渗透油气田渗透率的精确表征是石油工程中一个迫切需要解决的问题,在低渗透油气田中,标准试井是无效的。诊断性裂缝注入测试(DFITs)已成为重要的诊断表征工具,但现有的闭合后分析工具存在严重的局限性,例如对闭合识别的敏感性以及对伪径向流动模式的适用性有限。虽然已经研究了机器学习在DFIT解释中的应用,但现有的文献主要基于合成数据,对渗透率的预测较少,更多的是对封闭压力的预测,并且缺乏严格的可解释性分析,无法被行业所接受。在本研究中,基于包含620个测试的大型现场数据库,开发并验证了一系列机器学习模型,这些模型可以在给定DFIT g函数参数的情况下预测油藏渗透率。以系统的方式比较了十种算法,包括神经网络、梯度增强算法(CatBoost、XGBoost、LightGBM)、正则化线性模型和集成算法。多层感知器回归器(Multi-Layer Perceptron Regressor)在盲验证训练数据上的泛化效果较好,R²= 0.9576,RMSE = 0.0357 md, MAE = 0.0257 md(155个独立测试:R²= 0.9194,RMSE = 0.0805 md)。SHAP分析建立了物理上显著的关系,关闭时的g时间与渗透率呈最显著的负相关。利用遗传规划进行符号回归,得到一个互补方程模型,模型的R²为0.9379。所得到的模型比传统的分析方法更有效,并提供快速、精确和可解释的预测,可用于优化水力压裂设计和在具有挑战性的油藏条件下规划油田开发。
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书