2016
DOI: 10.1111/1365-2478.12428
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Statistical facies classification from multiple seismic attributes: comparison between Bayesian classification and expectation–maximization method and application in petrophysical inversion

Abstract: We present here a comparison between two statistical methods for facies classifications: Bayesian classification and expectation–maximization method. The classification can be performed using multiple seismic attributes and can be extended from well logs to three‐dimensional volumes. In this work, we propose, for both methods, a sensitivity study to investigate the impact of the choice of seismic attributes used to condition the classification. In the second part, we integrate the facies classification in a Ba… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These models were classified into distinct water masses. Bayesian classification (e.g., Avseth et al, 2005;Grana et al, 2017) was trained based on the existing direct measurements of temperature and salinity profiles of spatially located nearby Argo floats taken during the acquisition of the seismic oceanography data. N w different types of water were identified including the Central Atlantic Water, the Mediterranean Outflow and the Subarctic Intermediate Waters, as described in Comas-Rodríguez et al (2011).…”
Section: Number Of Channels 636mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These models were classified into distinct water masses. Bayesian classification (e.g., Avseth et al, 2005;Grana et al, 2017) was trained based on the existing direct measurements of temperature and salinity profiles of spatially located nearby Argo floats taken during the acquisition of the seismic oceanography data. N w different types of water were identified including the Central Atlantic Water, the Mediterranean Outflow and the Subarctic Intermediate Waters, as described in Comas-Rodríguez et al (2011).…”
Section: Number Of Channels 636mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some studies use the aid of seismic attributes (e.g. P wave impedance, S wave impedance and density) from inversion to generate the facies model in the reservoir through classification (Roncarolo & Grana, 2010;Grana, 2016;Tellez et al, 2017). Since elastic inversions provide only information about the seismic bandwidth, some studies avoid this problem by combining the inversion with the low frequency model, in addition to petrophysical information, for the construction of the facies model (Sams & Saussus, 2013;Zabihi Naeini & Exley, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cluster analysis methods attempt to group various attributes of interest within some generally multi-dimensional feature-(or attribute-) space, based on some distance measure between each data point from the centres of identified groups of data which are commonly referred to as clusters. The probabilities that each data point belongs to each of the identified clusters can then be estimated by assigning a probability distribution to each of the clusters, for example using a multivariate Gaussian distribution in a Gaussian mixture model (GMM) which is a term used to describe a sum of Gaussians, e.g., Grana et al (2016). A typical problem with such cluster analysis methods is that they estimate probabilities with high entropy (uncertainty) for those data points that fall equidistant from cluster centres, or in cases where there is a significant overlap between different cluster distributions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%