2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Seismic anisotropy prediction using ML methods: A case study on an offshore carbonate oilfield

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Estimating seismic anisotropy parameters, such as Thomson’s parameters, is crucial for investigating fractured and finely layered geological media. However, many inversion methods rely on complex physical models with initial assumptions, leading to non-reproducible estimates and subjective fracture interpretation. To address these limitations, this study utilizes machine learning methods: support vector regression, extreme gradient boost, multi-layer perceptron, and a convolutional neural network. The abundance of seismic features leads to many feature combinations, making the training and testing of machine learning models challenging. Therefore, a workflow has been developed to systematically inspect seismic features and select the most appropriate one for anisotropy estimation with reasonable accuracy. Synthetic data were generated using an earth model and well data within a finite difference numerical program. After thoroughly investigating synthetic data, the amplitudes of direct and reflected waves in the time and frequency domains were selected as input features to train machine learning methods. Optimizing the machine learning hyperparameters allowed the training and testing procedures to be completed with high accuracy. Subsequently, the optimized machine learning methods were used to predict Thomsen’s parameters, ε and δ, of a shaley formation in the zone area. To validate the predictions, the ε and δ estimated at a well location were compared with those obtained using a physics-based model, resulting in the least relative errors ranging from 2.92% to 7.14%.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions

          Understanding why a model makes a certain prediction can be as crucial as the prediction's accuracy in many applications. However, the highest accuracy for large modern datasets is often achieved by complex models that even experts struggle to interpret, such as ensemble or deep learning models, creating a tension between accuracy and interpretability. In response, various methods have recently been proposed to help users interpret the predictions of complex models, but it is often unclear how these methods are related and when one method is preferable over another. To address this problem, we present a unified framework for interpreting predictions, SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations). SHAP assigns each feature an importance value for a particular prediction. Its novel components include: (1) the identification of a new class of additive feature importance measures, and (2) theoretical results showing there is a unique solution in this class with a set of desirable properties. The new class unifies six existing methods, notable because several recent methods in the class lack the proposed desirable properties. Based on insights from this unification, we present new methods that show improved computational performance and/or better consistency with human intuition than previous approaches. To appear in NIPS 2017
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain.

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Weak elastic anisotropy

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS One
                plos
                PLOS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                7 January 2025
                2025
                : 20
                : 1
                : e0311561
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Earth Sciences Department, Khalifa University of Sciences and Technology, Abu Dhabi, UAE
                [2 ] Mathematics Department, Khalifa University of Sciences and Technology, Abu Dhabi, UAE
                [3 ] Geosciences Department, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran, KSA
                China University of Mining and Technology, CHINA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2368-3302
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9741-0636
                Article
                PONE-D-24-04713
                10.1371/journal.pone.0311561
                11706415
                39774534
                847b48d0-c84a-473f-8ace-c8ad2898ba85
                © 2025 Zhao et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 19 February 2024
                : 20 September 2024
                Page count
                Figures: 16, Tables: 4, Pages: 29
                Funding
                The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Physical Sciences
                Physics
                Condensed Matter Physics
                Anisotropy
                Physical Sciences
                Materials Science
                Material Properties
                Anisotropy
                Computer and Information Sciences
                Artificial Intelligence
                Machine Learning
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Mathematical and Statistical Techniques
                Mathematical Functions
                Time Domain Analysis
                Physical Sciences
                Physics
                Waves
                Wave Propagation
                Computer and Information Sciences
                Artificial Intelligence
                Machine Learning
                Support Vector Machines
                Computer and Information Sciences
                Neural Networks
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Neural Networks
                Engineering and Technology
                Signal Processing
                Seismic Signal Processing
                Computer and Information Sciences
                Artificial Intelligence
                Artificial Neural Networks
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Computational Biology
                Computational Neuroscience
                Artificial Neural Networks
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Computational Neuroscience
                Artificial Neural Networks
                Custom metadata

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log