4.7 Article

Lithofacies identification using multiple adaptive resonance theory neural networks and group decision expert system

Journal

COMPUTERS & GEOSCIENCES
Volume 26, Issue 5, Pages 591-601

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0098-3004(00)00010-8

Keywords

fuzzy rules; pattern recognition; petroleum reservoir characterization; carbonates

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lithofacies identification supplies qualitative information about rocks. Lithofacies represent rock textures and an important components of hydrocarbon reservoir description. Traditional techniques of lithofacies identification from core data are costly and different geologists may provide different interpretations. In this paper, we present a low-cost intelligent system consisting of three adaptive resonance theory neural networks and a rule-based expert system to consistently and objectively identify lithofacies from well-log data. The input data are altered into different forms representing different perspectives of observation of lithofacies. Each form of input is processed by a different adaptive resonance theory neural network. Among these three adaptive resonance theory neural networks, one neural network processes the raw continuous data, another processes categorical data, and the third processes fuzzy-set data. Outputs from these three networks are then combined by the expert system using fuzzy inference to determine to which facies the input data should be assigned. Rules are prioritized to emphasize the importance of firing order. This new approach combines the learning ability of neural networks, the adaptability of fuzzy logic, and the expertise of geologists to infer facies of the rocks. This approach is applied to the Appleton Field, an oil held located in Escambia County, Alabama. The hybrid intelligence system data with 87.6% accuracy.predicts lithofacies identity from log of single adaptive resonance theory data, respectively, and by an error. This prediction is more accurate than those networks, 79.3%, 68.0% and 66.0%, using raw, fuzzy-set, and categorical backpropagation neural network, 57.3%. (C) 2000 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available