IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,437,231
Granted Patent B2
US 12,437,231 · App. 17/310,449 · Granted Oct 7, 2025

Differential multi model training for multiple interpretation options

Inventors: Francis Grady (Stavanger, NO); Mats Stivang Ramfjord (Asker, NO)
Assignee: SCHLUMBERGER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
G06N20/00G01V1/282
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,437,231
App. No.
17/310,449
Granted
Oct 7, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Computing systems, computer-readable media, and methods for providing multiple computer-generated seismic data interpretation options, of which the method includes receiving a training input, sorting the training input into a first group and a second group, subgrouping the second group into a plurality of subgroups, generating a plurality of trained models based on the plurality of subgroups and the first group, receiving a prediction input having a set of data to be interpreted, generating a plurality of interpretation options for the prediction input by applying the plurality of training models to the prediction input, and outputting the plurality of interpretation options.

Claims (76)

1. A method, comprising:

receiving a training input comprising a plurality of interpretations for a set of training seismic data, each of the plurality of interpretations corresponding to a respective data interpreter;

sorting the training input into: a first group comprising portions of the plurality of interpretations that are in agreement for all of the plurality of interpretations; and

a second group comprising portions of the plurality of interpretations that are in disagreement for at least two of the plurality of interpretations;

subgrouping the second group into a plurality of subgroups, each of the plurality of subgroups corresponding to one of the plurality of interpretations;

generating a plurality of machine-learning trained models, each of the plurality of machine- learning trained models being based on a respective one of the plurality of subgroups and the first group;

receiving a prediction input having a set of data to be interpreted;

generating a plurality of interpretation options for the prediction input by applying each of the plurality of machine-learning trained models to the prediction input, each of the plurality of interpretation options corresponding to a respective data interpreter;

outputting the plurality of interpretation options;

assigning a respective score to each of the plurality of interpretation options, each respective score being assigned according to at least one scoring rule, the at least one scoring rule including:

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter having a greater experience level than to an interpretation corresponding to another data interpreter having a lesser experience level;

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter who uses one or more particular techniques; or

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter specializing in a particular geographic location corresponding to the prediction input;

sequentially sorting the plurality of interpretation options based on the assigned scores;

selecting at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options, the selecting being in sequential order according to the sorting and including first selecting a best score among the scores; and

sending a signal to a controller to cause a drilling tool in a drilling operation to deviate from an original drilling plan based on the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options to perform at least one mitigating action comprising controlling at least one of: drilling, weight on a bit, a pump rate, or a physical parameter of the drilling operation,

wherein the at least one mitigating action improves an operating condition of the drilling operation based on the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options or avoids a problem identified by the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of interpretations includes interpretations of seismic data.

3. The method of claim 2 , wherein:

the first group comprises a portion of the training input in which interpretations of the seismic data match; and

the second group comprises a portion of the training input in which the interpretations of the seismic data do not match.

4. The method of claim 3 , wherein individual subgroups of the plurality of subgroups are associated with interpretation attributes.

5. The method of claim 1 , wherein the prediction input includes target seismic data to be interpreted.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein the machine-learning trained models are further generated based on a supervised machine learning technique.

7. A computing system, comprising:

one or more processors; and

a memory system comprising one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by at least one of the one or more processors, cause the computing system to perform operations, the operations comprising:

receiving a training input comprising a plurality of interpretations for a set of training seismic data, each of the plurality of interpretations corresponding to a respective data interpreter;

sorting the training input into:

a first group comprising portions of the plurality of interpretations that are in agreement for all of the plurality of interpretations; and

a second group comprising portions of the plurality of interpretations that are in disagreement for at least two of the plurality of interpretations;

subgrouping the second group into a plurality of subgroups, each of the plurality of subgroups corresponding to one of the plurality of interpretations;

generating a plurality of machine-learning trained models; each of the plurality of machine-learning trained models being based on a respective one of the plurality of subgroups and the first group;

receiving a prediction input having a set of data to be interpreted;

generating a plurality of interpretation options for the prediction input by applying each of the plurality of machine-learning trained models to the prediction input, each of the plurality of interpretation options corresponding to a respective data interpreter;

outputting the plurality of interpretation options;

assigning a respective score to each of the plurality of interpretation options, each respective score being assigned according to at least one scoring rule, the at least one scoring rule including:

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter having a greater experience level than to an interpretation corresponding to another data interpreter having a lesser experience level;

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter who uses one or more particular techniques; or

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter specializing in a particular geographic location corresponding to the prediction input;

sequentially sorting the plurality of interpretation options based on the assigned scores;

selecting at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options, the selecting being in sequential order according to the sorting and including first selecting a best score among the scores; and

the one or more processors sending a signal to a controller to cause a drilling tool in a drilling operation to deviate from an original drilling plan based on the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options to perform at least one mitigating action comprising controlling at least one of: drilling, weight on a bit, a pump rate, or a physical parameter of the drilling operation,

wherein the at least one mitigating action improves an operating condition of the drilling operation based on the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options or avoids a problem identified by the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options.

8. The system of claim 7 , wherein the plurality of interpretations includes interpretations of seismic data.

9. The system of claim 8 , wherein:

the first group comprises a portion of the training input in which interpretations of the seismic data match; and

the second group comprises a portion of the training input in which the interpretations of the seismic data do not match.

10. The system of claim 9 , wherein individual subgroups of the plurality of subgroups are associated with interpretation attributes.

11. The system of claim 7 , wherein the prediction input includes target seismic data to be interpreted.

12. The system of claim 7 , wherein the machine-learning trained models are further generated based on a supervised machine learning technique.

13. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a computing system, cause the computing system to perform operations, the operations comprising:

receiving a training input comprising a plurality of interpretations for a set of training seismic data, each of the plurality of interpretations corresponding to a respective data interpreter;

sorting the training input into:

a first group comprising portions of the plurality of interpretations that are in agreement for all of the plurality of interpretations; and

a second group comprising portions of the plurality of interpretations that are in disagreement for at least two of the plurality of interpretations;

subgrouping the second group into a plurality of subgroups, each of the plurality of subgroups corresponding to one of the plurality of interpretations;

generating a plurality of machine-learning trained models, each of the plurality of machine-learning trained models being based on a respective one of the plurality of subgroups and the first group;

receiving a prediction input having a set of data to be interpreted;

generating a plurality of interpretation options for the prediction input by applying each of the plurality of machine-learning trained models to the prediction input, each of the plurality of interpretation options corresponding to a respective data interpreter;

outputting the plurality of interpretation options;

assigning a respective score to each of the plurality of interpretation options, each respective score being assigned according to at least one scoring rule, the at least one scoring rule including:

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter having a greater experience level than to an interpretation corresponding to another data interpreter having a lesser experience level;

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter who uses one or more particular techniques; or

assigning a better score to an interpretation corresponding to a data interpreter specializing in a particular geographic location corresponding to the prediction input;

sequentially sorting the plurality of interpretation options based on the assigned scores;

selecting at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options, the selecting being in sequential order according to the sorting and including first selecting a best score among the scores; and

the one or more processors sending a signal to a controller to cause a drilling tool in a drilling operation to deviate from an original drilling plan based on the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options to perform at least one mitigating action comprising controlling at least one of: drilling, weight on a bit, a pump rate, or a physical parameter of the drilling operation,

wherein the at least one mitigating action improves an operating condition of the drilling operation based on the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options or avoids a problem identified by the selected at least one of the outputted plurality of interpretation options.

14. The computer-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the plurality of interpretations includes interpretations of seismic data.

15. The computer-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein:

the first group comprises a portion of the training input in which interpretations of the seismic data match; and

the second group comprises a portion of the training input in which the interpretations of the seismic data do not match.

16. The computer-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein individual subgroups of the plurality of subgroups are associated with interpretation attributes.

17. The computer-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the prediction input includes target seismic data to be interpreted.

18. The computer-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the machine-learning trained models are further generated based on a supervised machine learning technique.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 4, 2021
From: GRADY, FRANCIS; RAMFJORD, MATS STIVANG
To: SCHLUMBERGER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 057075/0730 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 62801584 · Feb 5, 2019
Related Publication 20220121987A1 · Apr 21, 2022
References Cited (20)
US 9934338B2 · Germain · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20130080066A1 · Al-Dossary et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130159314A1 · Kao · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20140225890A1 · Ronot · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20160313463A1 · Wahrmund · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160364654A1 · Gevirtz · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170254910A1 · Can et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180004865A1 · Borrel et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180106917A1 · Osypov · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20200124753A1 · Halsey · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210174225A1 · Mino · 2021 [cited by examiner]
Gong et al, 2017, “Learning with Inadequate and Incorrect Supervision” (Year: 2017). [cited by examiner]
Ansari et al, 2009, “Clustering analysis of the seismic catalog of Iran” (Year: 2009). [cited by examiner]
Communication Pursuant to Article 94(3) issued in European Patent Application No. 20752601.3 dated Sep. 21, 2023, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
International Preliminary Report on Patentability of International Patent Application No. PCT/US2020/016745 mailed Aug. 19, 2021, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion of International Patent Application No. PCT/US2020/016745, mailed Jun. 5, 2020, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
Xiao, H. et al., “Ensemble classification based on supervised clustering for credit scoring”, Applied Soft Computing, 2016, 43, pp. 73-86. [cited by applicant]
Abedini, M. et al., “Accurate and Scalable System for Automatic Detection of Malignant Melanoma”, in Dermoscopy Image Analysis, 2015, 53 pages. [cited by applicant]
Sagi, O. et al., “Ensemble learning: A survey”, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2018, 8(4), 18 pages. [cited by applicant]
Extended Search Report issued in European Patent Application 20752601.3 dated Sep. 9, 2022, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]