ARTICLE

Reservoir porosity determination from 3D seismic data – Application of two machine learning techniques

ISHEH ALIMORADI1 ALI MORADZADEH1 MOHAMMAD REZA BAKHTIARI2,3
Show Less
1 Department of Mining, Petroleum and Geophysics Engineering, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran.,
2 Department of Petroleum Engineering, Amir Kabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran, Iran.,
3 National Iranian Oil Company, Exploration Directorate, Tehran, Iran.,
JSE 2012, 21(4), 323–345;
Submitted: 9 June 2025 | Revised: 9 June 2025 | Accepted: 9 June 2025 | Published: 9 June 2025
© 2025 by the Authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Abstract

Alimoradi, A., Moradzadeh, A. and Bakhtiari, M.R., 2012. Reservoir porosity determination from 3D seismic data - application of two machine learning techniques. Journal of Seismic Exploration, 21: 323-345. This paper proposes a method for solving 3D seismic data inversion problems for prediction of porosity in hydrocarbon reservoirs. An actual carbonate oil field in the south-western part of Iran was selected for this study. Taking real geological conditions into account, different synthetic models of reservoir were constructed for a range of viable porosity values. Seismic surveying was performed next on these models. From seismic response of the synthetic models, a large number of seismic attributes were identified as candidates for porosity estimation. Classes of attributes such as energy, instantaneous, and frequency attributes were included amongst others. Applying sensitivity analysis, the two most significant attributes were determined as Envelope Weighted Phase and Envelope Weighted Frequency, which were subsequently used in our machine learning algorithms. In particular, we used feed-forward artificial neural networks (FNN) and support vector regression machines (SVR) to develop relationships between the known synthetic attributes and synthetic porosity values in a given setting. The FNN consists of six neurons in a single hidden layer and the SVR method uses a Gaussian radial basis function. Compared with real values from the well data, we observed that SVM outperforms FNN due to its better handling of noise and model complexity.

Keywords
seismic inversion
seismic attributes
synthetic data
feed forward neural network
support vector machine
References
  1. Alimoradi, A., Moradzadeh, A. and Bakhtiari, M.R., 2011. Modifying Gassmann equation to
  2. determine the effect of pores sizes in carbonate reservoirs characterization. Petrol. Science,
  3. under review.
  4. An, P., 1994. The effect of random noise in lateral reservoir characterization using feedforward
  5. neural networks. Expanded Abstr., 64th Ann. Internat. SEG Mtg., Los Angeles: 787-790.
  6. An, P. and Moon, W.M., 1993. Reservoir characterization using feedforward neural networks.
  7. Expanded Abstr., 63rd Ann. Internat. SEG Mtg., Washington D.C.: 258-262.
  8. An, P., Moon, W.M. and Kalantzis, F., 1997. Reservoir Property Estimation Using the Seismic
  9. Waveform and Feedforward Neural Networks. Report for Schlumberger.
  10. Batyrshin, I., Kaynak, O. and Rudas, I., 2002. Fuzzy modeling based on generalized conjunction
  11. operations. IEEE Transact. Fuzzy Syst., 10: 678-683.
  12. Batyrshin, I., Sheremetov, L., Markov, M. and Panova, A., 2005. Hybrid method for porosity
  13. classification in carbonate formations. J. Petrol. Science Engin., 47: 35-50.
  14. Chih-Hung, W., Gwo-Hshiung, T. and Rong-Ho, L., 2009. A novel hybrid genetic algorithm for
  15. Kernel function and parameter optimization in support vector regression. Expert Syst.
  16. Applic., 36: 4725-4735.
  17. Demuth, H. and Beale, M., 2002. Neural Network Toolbox for Use with MATLAB, Version 3.0,
  18. 742pp.
  19. dGB Earth Sciences, 2008. Seismic Software & Services, OpendTect, Version 4.0
  20. Duda, R.A., Hart, P.E. and Stork, D.G., 2002. Pattern Classification. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
  21. RESERVOIR POROSITY DETERMINATION 345
  22. Edalat, A. and Siahkoohi, H., 2007. Description of one of the Iranian hydrocarbon reservoirs using
  23. seismic facies analysis. Iran. Geophys. J., 11: 37-49.
  24. Hagan, M.T., Demuth, H.B. and Beale, M., 1996. Neural Network Design. PWS Publishing
  25. Company, Boston, MA.
  26. Jang, J.S.R., Sun, C.T. and Mizutani, E., 1997. Neuro-Fuzzy and Soft Computing: A
  27. Computational Approach to Learning and Machine Intelligence. Prentice Hall, Englewood
  28. Cliffs, NJ.
  29. Lia, Q., Licheng, J. and Yingjuan, H., 2007. Adaptive simplification of solution for support vector
  30. machine. Pattern Recogn., 40: 972-980.
  31. Lim, J.S., 2005. Reservoir properties determination using fuzzy logic and neural networks from well
  32. data in offshore Korea. J. Petrol. Sci. Engin., 49: 182-192.
  33. Liu, H., Wen, S., Li, W., Xu, C. and Hu, C., 2009. Study on identification of oil/gas and water
  34. zones in geological logging based on support-vector machine. Fuzzy Inform. Engin., 2,
  35. AISC 62: 849-857.
  36. Liu, H., Yao, X., Zhang, R., Liu, M., Hu, Z. and Fan, B., 2006. The accurate QSPR models to
  37. predict the bioconcentration factors of nonionic organic compounds based on the Heuristic
  38. method and support vector machine. Chemosphere, 63: 722-733.
  39. Malvic, T. and Prskalo, S., 2007. Some benefits of the neural approach in porosity prediction case
  40. study from Benicanci Field. NAFTA, 58: 455-461.
  41. Mavko, G., Mukerji, T. and Dvorkin, J., 2009. The Rock Physics Handbook. Cambridge University
  42. Press, Cambridge.
  43. Mohaghegh, S., Arefi, R., Ameri, S., Amini, K. and Nutter, R., 1996. Petroleum reservoir
  44. characterization with the aid of artificial neural networks. J. Petrol. Sci. Engin., 16:
  45. 263-274.
  46. Mohaghegh, S., Popa, A., Koperna, G. and Hill, D., 1999. Reducing the Cost of Field-Scale Log
  47. Analysis Using Virtual Intelligence Techniques. SPE 57454, Tulsa, OK.
  48. Nikravesh, M., Aminzadeh, F. and Zadeh, L.A., 2003. Soft Computing and Intelligent Data
  49. Analysis. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.
  50. Pezeshk, S., Camp, C.V. and Karprapu, S., 1996. Geophysical log interpretation using neural
  51. network ASCE. J. Comput. Civil Engin., 10: 136-142.
  52. Quang-Anh, T., Xing, L. and Haixin, D., 2005. Efficient performance estimate for one-class
  53. support vector machine. Pattern Recogn. Lett., 26: 1174-1182.
  54. Raymer, L.L., Hunt, E.R. and Gardner, J.S., 1980. An improved sonic transit time-to-porosity
  55. transform. SPWLA Transact., 21st Ann. SPWLA Symp., Paper P, Tulsa, OK.
  56. Scholkopf, B., Smola, A.J. and Muller, K.R., 1998. Nonlinear component analysis as a Kernel
  57. eigenvalues problem. Neural Comput., 10: 1299-1319.
  58. Wang, W.J., Xu, Z.B., Lu, W.Z. and Zhang, X.Y., 2003. Determination of the spread parameter
  59. in the Gaussian Kernel for classification and regression. Neurocomput., 55: 643-663.
  60. Wyllie, M.R.J., Gregory, A.R. and Gardner, L.W., 1958. An experimental investigation of factors
  61. affecting elastic wave velocities in porous media. Geophysics, 23: 459-493.
Share
Back to top
Journal of Seismic Exploration, Electronic ISSN: 0963-0651 Print ISSN: 0963-0651, Published by AccScience Publishing