Intelligent formation pore-pressure prediction via feature optimization and cascaded transfer learning
Traditional pore-pressure prediction relies heavily on empirical formulas and subjective judgment, whereas existing machine learning models exhibit limited generalization across regions and overpressure mechanisms. This study proposes an intelligent prediction method integrating feature optimization with cascaded domain-adaptive transfer learning to improve the generalizability of pore-pressure prediction. A regional dataset was first constructed from well-logging data of 14 exploratory wells in an offshore area. The continuous pore-pressure profiles used as regression targets were derived using conventional pore-pressure evaluation methods and independently assessed against available formation-pressure measurements, rather than being treated as direct pressure measurements at every depth. Hydrostatic pressure was introduced as a vertical physical constraint, and a deviation feature based on an independently constructed, target-well-excluded regional reference velocity curve was developed to reduce reliance on manually defined normal compaction trends, thereby improving inter-well feature comparability and physical interpretability. To mitigate physical inconsistencies and data distribution shifts caused by differences in overpressure mechanisms, including hydrocarbon-generation-related unloading and undercompaction, a cascaded domain-adaptation model combining canonical correlation analysis and transfer component analysis was established. This model adopts a strategy of semantic alignment followed by distribution adaptation, thereby reducing the maximum mean discrepancy between the source and target domains. Validation was conducted using blocked-depth validation, same-mechanism whole-well validation, and multiple cross-mechanism source–target transfer experiments, together with repeated perturbation-based uncertainty analysis. Results show that the proposed features and transfer-learning model improved prediction performance and physical interpretability under the tested conditions. The proposed method demonstrates potential for cross-well pore-pressure prediction under the tested multi-mechanism conditions within the study area.
- Zhang J. Pore pressure prediction from well logs: methods, modifications, and new approaches. Earth Sci Rev. 2011;108(1-2):50-63. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2011.06.001
- Dutta NC. Geopressure prediction using seismic data: current status and the road ahead. Geophysics. 2002;67(6):2012-2041. doi: 10.1190/1.1527101
- Athy LF. Density, porosity, and compaction of sedimentary rocks. AAPG Bull. 1930;14(1):1-24. doi: 10.1306/3D93289E-16B1-11D7-8645000102C1865D
- Hubbert MK, Rubey WW. Role of fluid pressure in mechanics of overthrust faulting: I. Mechanics of fluid-filled porous solids and its application to overthrust faulting. Geol Soc Am Bull. 1959;70(2):115-166. doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1959)70[115:ROFPIM]2.0.CO;2
- Hottmann CE, Johnson RK. Estimation of formation pressures from log-derived shale properties. J Pet Technol. 1965;17(6):717-722. doi: 10.2118/1110-PA
- Foster JB, Whalen HE. Estimation of formation pressures from electrical surveys—offshore Louisiana. J Pet Technol. 1966;18(2):165-171. doi: 10.2118/1200-PA
- Eaton BA. The effect of overburden stress on geopressure prediction from well logs. J Pet Technol. 1972;24(8):929-934. doi: 10.2118/3719-PA
- Bowers GL. Pore pressure estimation from velocity data: accounting for overpressure mechanisms besides undercompaction. SPE Drill Complet. 1995;10(2):89-95. doi: 10.2118/27488-PA
- Osborne MJ, Swarbrick RE. Mechanisms for generating overpressure in sedimentary basins: a reevaluation. AAPG Bull. 1997;81(6):1023-1041. doi: 10.1306/522B49C9-1727-11D7-8645000102C1865D
- Yardley GS, Swarbrick RE. Lateral transfer: a source of additional overpressure? Mar Pet Geol. 2000;17(4):523-537. doi: 10.1016/S0264-8172(00)00007-6
- Tingay MRP, Hillis RR, Swarbrick RE, Morley CK, Damit AR. Origin of overpressure and pore-pressure prediction in the Baram province, Brunei. AAPG Bull. 2009;93(1):51-74. doi: 10.1306/08080808016
- Zhang J. Effective stress, porosity, velocity and abnormal pore pressure prediction accounting for compaction disequilibrium and unloading. Mar Pet Geol. 2013;45:2-11. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2013.04.007
- Wyllie MRJ, Gregory AR, Gardner LW. Elastic wave velocities in heterogeneous and porous media. Geophysics. 1956;21(1):41-70. doi: 10.1190/1.1438217
- Gardner GHF, Gardner LW, Gregory AR. Formation velocity and density—the diagnostic basics for stratigraphic traps. Geophysics. 1974;39(6):770-780. doi: 10.1190/1.1440465
- Castagna JP, Batzle ML, Eastwood RL. Relationships between compressional-wave and shear-wave velocities in clastic silicate rocks. Geophysics. 1985;50(4):571-581. doi: 10.1190/1.1441933
- Han DH, Nur A, Morgan D. Effects of porosity and clay content on wave velocities in sandstones. Geophysics. 1986;51(11):2093-2107. doi: 10.1190/1.1442062
- Xu S, White RE. A new velocity model for clay-sand mixtures. Geophys Prospect. 1995;43(1):91-118. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2478.1995.tb00126.x
- Bosch M, Mukerji T, Gonzalez EF. Seismic inversion for reservoir properties combining statistical rock physics and geostatistics: a review. Geophysics. 2010;75(5):75A165-75A176. doi: 10.1190/1.3478209
- Grana D, Azevedo L, de Figueiredo L, Connolly P, Mukerji T. Probabilistic inversion of seismic data for reservoir petrophysical characterization: review and examples. Geophysics. 2022;87(5):M199-M216. doi: 10.1190/geo2021-0776.1
- Yu B, Shi Y, Tian Y, et al. Anisotropic Bayesian linearized stochastic seismic inversion with multi-parameter decoupling. J Geophys Eng. 2024;21(3):961-980. doi: 10.1093/jge/gxae049
- Liu L, Shen G, Wang Z, Yang H, Han H, Cheng Y. Abnormal formation velocities and applications to pore pressure prediction. J Appl Geophys. 2018;153:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2018.02.013
- Wang H, Ma J, Li L. Pore pressure prediction based on rock physics theory and its application in seismic inversion. J Appl Geophys. 2024;229:105494. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2024.105494
- Radwan AE, Wood DA, Radwan AA. Machine learning and data-driven prediction of pore pressure from geophysical logs: a case study for the Mangahewa gas field, New Zealand. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng. 2022;14(6):1799-1809. doi: 10.1016/j.jrmge.2022.01.012
- Al-Fakih A, Kaka SI, Koeshidayatullah AI. Reservoir property prediction in the North Sea using machine learning. IEEE Access. 2023;11:140148-140160. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3336623
- Al-Fakih A, Ibrahim AF, Elkatatny S, Abdulraheem A. Estimating electrical resistivity from logging data for oil wells using machine learning. J Pet Explor Prod Technol. 2023;13(6):1453-1461. doi: 10.1007/s13202-023-01617-2
- Al-Fakih A, Li K. Estimation of bottom-hole temperature based on machine/deep learning. In: Proceedings of the 2021 International Petroleum and Petrochemical Technology Conference. Singapore: Springer; 2022:340-353. doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-9427-1_33
- Al-Fakih A, Koeshidayatullah A, Mukerji T, Kaka SI. Enhanced anomaly detection in well log data through the application of ensemble GANs. Appl Comput Geosci. 2026;29:100316. doi: 10.1016/j.acags.2025.100316
- Koeshidayatullah A, Al-Fakih A, Kaka SI. Toward basin-agnostic well log imputation and anomaly detection via a pre-trained time-series foundation model. Energy Geosci. 2026;7(2):100536. doi: 10.1016/j.engeos.2026.100536
- Xu Y, Yang L, Xu J, et al. Prediction method for formation pore pressure based on transfer learning. Geoenergy Sci Eng. 2024;236:212747. doi: 10.1016/j.geoen.2024.212747
- Wang ZF, Cao H, Yang ZF, Xu HQ, Yang MQ, Zhao YS. Transfer learning seismic impedance inversion method based on temporal convolutional networks. J Seism Explor. 2022;31(4):391-405.
- Zhang Y, Singh S, Thanoon D, Devarakota P, Jin L, Tsvankin I. Physics-guided unsupervised deep-learning seismic inversion with uncertainty quantification. J Seism Explor. 2023;32(3):257-270.
- Li ZX, Ma JH, Qi Z, Zhang LW, Xie F, Yang JL. Accelerating the U-Net-based adaptive subtraction with transfer learning for removing seismic multiples in field data. J Seism Explor. 2023;32(4):373-384.
- Tian L, Sun S, Li Q, Shi J. Data-driven high-resolution gas-bearing prediction in tight sandstones: a case study from block L, eastern Ordos Basin. J Seism Explor. 2025;34(3):13-24. doi: 10.36922/JSE025320053
- Guo Q, Zhao X, Ba J, Luo C. Porosity prediction with Bi-LSTM network for deep methane reservoirs. J Seism Explor. 2025;34(6):29-44. doi: 10.36922/JSE025410087
- Li F, Zhang M, Liang Q, et al. A two-branch convolutional neural network for pre-stack elastic parameter inversion of coal-bearing gas reservoirs. J Seism Explor. 2026;35(2):271-289. doi: 10.36922/JSE025390076
- Hardoon DR, Szedmak S, Shawe-Taylor J. Canonical correlation analysis: an overview with application to learning methods. Neural Comput. 2004;16(12):2639-2664. doi: 10.1162/0899766042321814
- Pan SJ, Yang Q. A survey on transfer learning. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 2010;22(10):1345-1359. doi: 10.1109/TKDE.2009.191
- Zhuang F, Qi Z, Duan K, et al. A comprehensive survey on transfer learning. Proc IEEE. 2021;109(1):43-76. doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2020.3004555
- Pan SJ, Tsang IW, Kwok JT, Yang Q. Domain adaptation via transfer component analysis. IEEE Trans Neural Netw. 2011;22(2):199-210. doi: 10.1109/TNN.2010.2091281
- Bentéjac C, Csörgő A, Martínez-Muñoz G. A comparative analysis of gradient boosting algorithms. Artif Intell Rev. 2021;54(3):1937-1967. doi: 10.1007/s10462-020-09896-5
- Lundberg SM, Erion G, Chen H, et al. From local explanations to global understanding with explainable AI for trees. Nat Mach Intell. 2020;2(1):56-67. doi: 10.1038/s42256-019-0138-9
