Impact of rock-physics depth trends and Markov random fields on hierarchical Bayesian lithology/fluid prediction

Geophysics ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. R93-R108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kjartan Rimstad ◽  
Henning Omre

Early assessments of petroleum reservoirs are usually based on seismic data and observations in a small number of wells. Decision-making concerning the reservoir will be improved if these data can be integrated and converted into a lithology/fluid map of the reservoir. We analyze lithology/fluid prediction in a Bayesian setting, based on prestack seismic data and well observations. The likelihood model contains a convolved linearized Zoeppritz relation and rock-physics models with depth trends caused by compaction and cementation. Well observations are assumed to be exact. The likelihood model contains several global parameters such as depth trend, wavelets, and error parameters; the inference of these is an integral part of the study. The prior model is based on a profile Markov random field parameterized to capture different continuity directions for lithologies and fluids. The posterior model captures prediction and model-parameter uncertainty and is assessed by Markov-chain Monte Carlo simulation-based inference. The inversion model is evaluated on a synthetic and a real data case. It is concluded that geologically plausible lithology/fluid predictions can be made. Rock physics depth trends have influence when cementation is present and/or predictions at depth outside the well range are made. Inclusion of model-parameter uncertainty makes the prediction uncertainties more realistic.

Geophysics ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 978-993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo Eidsvik ◽  
Per Avseth ◽  
Henning Omre ◽  
Tapan Mukerji ◽  
Gary Mavko

Reservoir characterization must be based on information from various sources. Well observations, seismic reflection times, and seismic amplitude versus offset (AVO) attributes are integrated in this study to predict the distribution of the reservoir variables, i.e., facies and fluid filling. The prediction problem is cast in a Bayesian setting. The a priori model includes spatial coupling through Markov random field assumptions and intervariable dependencies through nonlinear relations based on rock physics theory, including Gassmann's relation. The likelihood model relating observations to reservoir variables (including lithology facies and pore fluids) is based on approximations to Zoeppritz equations. The model assumptions are summarized in a Bayesian network illustrating the dependencies between the reservoir variables. The posterior model for the reservoir variables conditioned on the available observations is defined by the a priori and likelihood models. This posterior model is not analytically tractable but can be explored by Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling. Realizations of reservoir variables from the posterior model are used to predict the facies and fluid‐filling distribution in the reservoir. A maximum a posteriori (MAP) criterion is used in this study to predict facies and pore‐fluid distributions. The realizations are also used to present probability maps for the favorable (sand, oil) occurrence in the reservoir. Finally, the impact of seismic AVO attributes—AVO gradient, in particular—is studied. The approach is demonstrated on real data from a turbidite sedimentary system in the North Sea. AVO attributes on the interface between reservoir and cap rock are extracted from 3D seismic AVO data. The AVO gradient is shown to be valuable in reducing the ambiguity between facies and fluids in the prediction.


Geophysics ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. B73-B82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marit Ulvmoen ◽  
Henning Omre ◽  
Arild Buland

We have performed lithology/fluid inversion based on prestack seismic data and well observations from a gas reservoir offshore Norway. The prior profile Markov random field model captures horizontal continuity and vertical sequencing of the lithology/fluid variables. The prior model is also locally adjusted for spatially varying lithology/fluid proportions. The likelihood model is inferred from basic seismic theory and observations in wells. An approximate posterior model is defined, which can be simulated from by an extremely computer-efficient algorithm. The lithology/fluid inversion results are compared to manual interpretations and evaluated by cross validation in one well. Moreover, inversions based on simplified prior models are developed for comparative reasons. Both lithology/fluid realizations and predictions look geologically reasonable. The results seem to reflect general reservoir experience and information provided by the prestack seismic data and well observations. The lithology/fluid proportions appear as geologically plausible and thin elongated lithology/fluid units are identified. The study is made in a 2D cross section, but extension to a full 3D setting is feasible.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (03) ◽  
pp. 1750022
Author(s):  
Xiuwei Yang ◽  
Peimin Zhu

Acoustic impedance (AI) from seismic inversion can indicate rock properties and can be used, when combined with rock physics, to predict reservoir parameters, such as porosity. Solutions to seismic inversion problem are almost nonunique due to the limited bandwidth of seismic data. Additional constraints from well log data and geology are needed to arrive at a reasonable solution. In this paper, sedimentary facies is used to reduce the uncertainty in inversion and rock physics modeling; the results not only agree with seismic data, but also conform to geology. A reservoir prediction method, which incorporates seismic data, well logs, rock physics and sedimentary facies, is proposed. AI was first derived by constrained sparse spike inversion (CSSI) using a sedimentary facies dependent low-frequency model, and then was transformed to reservoir parameters by sequential simulation, statistical rock physics and [Formula: see text]-model. Two numerical experiments using synthetic model and real data indicated that the sedimentary facies information may help to obtain a more reasonable prediction.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugénie S. Euskirchen ◽  
Shawn P. Serbin ◽  
Tobey B. Carman ◽  
Jennifer M. Fraterrigo ◽  
Hélène Genet ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document