2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2022.117216
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Unsupervised learning monitors the carbon-dioxide plume in the subsurface carbon storage reservoir

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Notably, the performance of the cDC-GAN model remained relatively robust even when confronted with increased reservoir heterogeneity using the same number of training samples. Furthermore, Gonzalez and Misra proposed a novel and reliable unsupervised learning approach based on multilevel clustering to visualize underground CO 2 plumes. Their method demonstrated excellent scalability, because unsupervised learning obviates the need for labeled data and can effectively handle large-scale data sets.…”
Section: Application Of Machine Learning In Geological Storagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Notably, the performance of the cDC-GAN model remained relatively robust even when confronted with increased reservoir heterogeneity using the same number of training samples. Furthermore, Gonzalez and Misra proposed a novel and reliable unsupervised learning approach based on multilevel clustering to visualize underground CO 2 plumes. Their method demonstrated excellent scalability, because unsupervised learning obviates the need for labeled data and can effectively handle large-scale data sets.…”
Section: Application Of Machine Learning In Geological Storagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another group of researchers from Texas A&M University developed an unsupervised-learning-based method to analyze sensor-based data from geological storage sites and to rapidly predict the move-ment of CO 2 plumes. This model does not rely on a geological model and may be applied to crosswell seismic tomography data [342].…”
Section: Emerging Co 2 Monitoring Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using two clusters yielded an average value of 0.5156, three clusters yielded an average value of 0.5004, and four clusters yielded an average value of 0.5500. Based on the computation of the silhouette index, if the average value is close to the value of one, the data grouping is considered better [10].…”
Section: E Cluster Testmentioning
confidence: 99%