IP Library Granted Patent US 12,645,003
Granted Patent B2
US 12,645,003 · App. 17/692,724 · Granted Jun 2, 2026

Method for predicting a geophysical model of a subterranean region of interest

Inventors: Daniele Colombo (Dhahran, SA); Diego Rovetta (Delft, NL)
Assignee: SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY
G01V1/282G01V20/00G06F30/27
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 12,645,003
App. No.
17/692,724
Granted
Jun 2, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

A system and methods are disclosed for determining a model of a subterranean region. The method includes obtaining an observed dataset and a current model for the subterranean region, simulating a dataset from the current model, and determining a data penalty function based on a difference between the observed and simulated datasets. The method further includes training a machine learning (ML) network to predict a model from the observed dataset and determining the predicted model using the trained ML network. The method further includes determining a first model penalty function based on the current model, a second model penalty function based on a difference between the current and the predicted models, and a composite penalty function based on a weighted sum of the data penalty function, the first and the second model penalty functions. Finally, the method includes determining the model based on an extremum of a composite penalty function.

Claims (86)

1 . A method for determining a geophysical model of a subterranean region, comprising:

obtaining an observed geophysical dataset from the subterranean region;

obtaining a current geophysical model for the subterranean region;

executing, by a computer processor, a training procedure that iteratively updates parameters of a deep learning neural network using a plurality of geophysical training models and a corresponding geophysical training dataset for each geophysical training model to produce a trained machine learning (ML) network configured to generate a predicted geophysical model;

generating, by the trained ML network executed on the computer processor, the predicted geophysical model from the observed geophysical dataset;

iteratively, until a convergence criterion is satisfied, performing steps comprising:

simulating, by a forward modeling method executed on the computer processor, a simulated geophysical dataset from the current geophysical model;

generating, using the computer processor, a data penalty function based on a difference between the observed geophysical dataset and the simulated geophysical dataset;

generating, using the computer processor, a first model penalty function based on the current geophysical model;

generating, using the computer processor, a second model penalty function based on a difference between the current geophysical model and the predicted geophysical model;

generating, using the computer processor, a composite penalty function based, at least in part, on a weighted sum of the data penalty function, the first model penalty function, and the second model penalty function;

generating, using the computer processor, an updated geophysical model based, at least in part, on finding an extremum of the composite penalty function; and

replacing the current geophysical model with the updated geophysical model;

wherein the geophysical model of the subterranean region is the updated geophysical model obtained upon satisfaction of the convergence criterion.

2 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

determining a location of a hydrocarbon reservoir based, at least in part, on the geophysical model; and

planning, using a wellbore planning system, a planned wellbore path to intersect the hydrocarbon reservoir.

3 . The method of claim 2 , further comprising drilling a wellbore guided by the planned wellbore path using a drilling system.

4 . The method of claim 1 , wherein executing the training procedure comprises:

determining the plurality of geophysical training models and the corresponding geophysical training dataset for each geophysical training model based, at least in part, on the current geophysical model; and

training the ML network based, at least in part, on finding an extremum of a training penalty function measuring a difference between each geophysical training model and a corresponding predicted geophysical training model.

5 . The method of claim 4 , wherein executing the training procedure further comprises:

augmenting the plurality of geophysical training models and the corresponding geophysical training datasets with the current geophysical model and the simulated geophysical dataset for the current geophysical model; and

retraining the trained ML network based, at least in part, on the augmented plurality of geophysical training models and the corresponding geophysical training datasets.

6 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the current geophysical model and the training geophysical models each comprises a plurality of geophysical model types selected from a seismic model, a density model, and a resistivity model.

7 . The method of claim 6 , wherein the first model penalty function comprises:

a measure of a first difference between the current geophysical model and a reference geophysical model;

a measure of a second difference between a spatial variation of each of the geophysical model types; and

a measure of a first correlation between values of each of the geophysical model types.

8 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the second model penalty function comprises:

a measure of a third difference between the current geophysical model and the predicted geophysical model predicted by the trained ML network;

a measure of a fourth difference between a spatial variation of the current geophysical model and a spatial variation of the predicted geophysical model; and

a measure of a second correlation between values of the current geophysical model and the predicted geophysical model.

9 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the extremum comprises a minimum.

10 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the forward modeling method comprises a physics-based forward modeling method.

11 . A non-transitory computer readable medium, storing instructions executable by a computer processor, the instructions comprising functionality for:

receiving an observed geophysical dataset from a subterranean region;

receiving a current geophysical model for the subterranean region;

executing a training procedure that iteratively updates parameters of a deep learning neural network using a plurality of geophysical training models and a corresponding geophysical training dataset for each geophysical training model to produce a trained machine learning (ML) network configured to generate a predicted geophysical model;

generating, by the trained ML network executed on the computer processor, the predicted geophysical model from the observed geophysical dataset;

iteratively, until a convergence criterion is satisfied, performing steps comprising

simulating, by a forward modeling method executed on the computer processor, a simulated geophysical dataset from the current geophysical model;

generating a data penalty function based on a difference between the observed geophysical dataset and the simulated geophysical dataset;

generating a first model penalty function based on the current geophysical model;

generating a second model penalty function based on a difference between the current geophysical model and the predicted geophysical model;

generating a composite penalty function based, at least in part, on a weighted sum of the data penalty function, the first model penalty function, and the second model penalty function;

generating an updated geophysical model based, at least in part, on finding an extremum of the composite penalty function; and

replacing the current geophysical model with the updated geophysical model;

wherein a geophysical model of the subterranean region is the updated geophysical model obtained upon satisfaction of the convergence criterion.

12 . The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 11 , the instructions further comprising the functionality for:

determining a location of a hydrocarbon reservoir based, at least in part, on the geophysical model; and

planning, using a wellbore planning system, a wellbore path to intersect the hydrocarbon reservoir.

13 . The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 11 , the instructions further comprising the functionality for:

determining the plurality of geophysical training models and the corresponding geophysical training dataset for each geophysical training model based, at least in part, on the current geophysical model of the subterranean region; and

training the ML network based, at least in part, on finding an extremum of a training penalty function measuring the difference between each geophysical training model and a corresponding predicted geophysical training model.

14 . The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 13 , the instructions further comprising the functionality for:

augmenting the plurality of geophysical training models and the corresponding geophysical training datasets with the current geophysical model and the simulated geophysical dataset for the current geophysical model; and

retraining the trained ML network based, at least in part, on the augmented plurality of geophysical training models and the corresponding geophysical training datasets.

15 . The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 11 , wherein the current geophysical model and the training geophysical models each comprises a plurality of geophysical model types selected from a seismic model, a density model, and a resistivity model.

16 . The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the first model penalty function comprises:

a measure of a first difference between the current geophysical model and a reference geophysical model;

a measure of a second difference between a spatial variation of each of the geophysical model types; and

a measure of a first correlation between values of each of the geophysical model types.

17 . The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 11 , wherein the second model penalty function comprises:

a measure of a third difference between the current geophysical model and the predicted geophysical model predicted by the trained ML network;

a measure of a fourth difference between a spatial variation of current geophysical model and a spatial variation of the predicted geophysical model; and

a measure of a second correlation between values of current geophysical model and the predicted geophysical model.

18 . The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 11 , wherein the extremum comprises a minimum.

19 . A system, comprising:

a computer system, configured to:

receive an observed geophysical dataset from a subterranean region,

receive a current geophysical model for the subterranean region,

execute a training procedure that iteratively updates parameters of a deep learning neural network using a plurality of geophysical training models and a corresponding geophysical training dataset for each geophysical training model to produce a trained machine learning (ML) network configured to generate a predicted geophysical model;

generate, by the trained ML network, the predicted geophysical model from the observed geophysical dataset;

iteratively, until a convergence criterion is satisfied, perform steps comprising:

simulate, by a forward modeling method, a simulated geophysical dataset from the current geophysical model,

generate a data penalty function based on a difference between the observed geophysical dataset and the simulated geophysical dataset,

generate a first model penalty function based on the current geophysical model,

generate a second model penalty function based on a difference between the current geophysical model and the predicted geophysical model,

generate a composite penalty function based, at least in part, on a weighted sum of the data penalty function, the first model penalty function, and the second model penalty function,

generate an updated geophysical model based, at least in part, on finding an extremum of the composite penalty function, and

replace the current geophysical model with the updated geophysical model,

wherein a geophysical model of the subterranean region is the updated geophysical model obtained upon satisfaction of the convergence criterion; and

generate a location of a hydrocarbon reservoir based, at least in part, on the geophysical model of the subterranean region; and

a wellbore planning system configured to plan a planned wellbore path to intersect the location of the hydrocarbon reservoir.

20 . The system of claim 19 , further comprising a drilling system to drill a wellbore guided by the planned wellbore path.

Assignments (3)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Oct 13, 2023
From: ARAMCO OVERSEAS COMPANY B.V.
To: SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY
Reel/Frame 065206/0876 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 29, 2022
From: COLOMBO, DANIELE
To: SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY
Reel/Frame 060933/0475 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 29, 2022
From: ROVETTA, DIEGO
To: ARAMCO OVERSEAS COMPANY B.V.
Reel/Frame 060933/0478 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20230288589A1 · Sep 14, 2023
References Cited (44)
US 8363509B2 · Colombo et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8861308B2 · Virgilio et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8923094B2 · Jing et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 10261215B2 · Miotti et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10920585B2 · Colombo et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 10996372B2 · Denli et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20160086079A1 · De Stefano · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20190195067A1 · Colombo et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190383965A1 · Salman et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200088896A1 · Schmedes et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200183031A1 · Denli et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200183041A1 · Denli et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200184374A1 · Liu et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200257016A1 · Abdallah et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210041596A1 · Kushwaha et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210239872A1 · Wheelock et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210264262A1 · Colombo et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
CN 109313724B · 2021 [cited by applicant]
EP 2020609A1 · 2009 [cited by applicant]
WO 2020257263A1 · 2020 [cited by applicant]
WO 2021130512A1 · 2021 [cited by applicant]
WO 2021168230A1 · 2021 [cited by applicant]
Moss, Adam. “Accelerated Bayesian inference using deep learning.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 496.1 (2020): 328-338. (Year: 2020). [cited by examiner]
Li, Zihang, et al. “Pertinent multigate mixture-of-experts-based prestack three-parameter seismic inversion.” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 60 (2022): 1-15. (Year: 2022). [cited by examiner]
Colombo D. et al., “High-resolution velocity modeling by seismic-airborne TEM joint inversion: a new perspective for near surface characterization”, The Leading Edge, vol. 35, Nov. 2016, pp. 977-985 (9 pages). [cited by applicant]
Colombo, D. and M. De Stefano, “Geophysical modeling via simultaneous joint inversion of seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic data: Application to prestack depth imaging”, The Leading Edge, vol. 26, Mar. 2007, pp. 326-… [cited by applicant]
Ronneberger, O. et al., “U-net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation”, May 2015, pp. 1-8, URL: <https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.04597v1> (8 pages). [cited by applicant]
Rovetta, Diego and Daniele Colombo, “Analysis of inter-domain coupling constraints for multi-physics joint inversion”, Inverse Problems, IOP Publishing Ltd., vol. 34, Nov. 2018, pp. 1-31 (31 pages). [cited by applicant]
Naeini, Ehsan Zabihi, “A machine learning approach to quantitative interpretation”, SEG International Exposition and 89th Annual Meeting, SEG, 2019, pp. 3176-3180 (5 pages). [cited by applicant]
Biswas, Reetam et al., “Prestack and poststack inversion using a physics-guided convolutional neural network”, Interpretation, Society of Exploration Geophysicists and American Association of Petroleum Geologists, vol. … [cited by applicant]
Colombo, Daniele et al., “Deep-learning electromagnetic monitoring coupled to fluid flow simulators”, Geophysics, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, vol. 85, No. 4, Jul.-Aug. 2020, pp. WA1-WA12 (12 pages). [cited by applicant]
Dogru, Ali H. et al., “A Next-Generation Parallel Reservoir Simulator for Giant Reservoirs”, SPE 119272, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Feb. 2009, pp. 1-29 (29 pages). [cited by applicant]
Archie, G.E., “The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics”, T.P. 1422, Petroleum Technology, Jan. 1942, pp. 54-62 (9 pages). [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US2021/018753, mailed on Aug. 11, 2021 (20 pages). [cited by applicant]
Colombo, Daniele et al., “Physics-driven deep learning joint inversion”, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2020, pp. 1775-1779, Sep. 30, 2020 (8 pages). [cited by applicant]
Moorkamp, Max et al., “Joint Inversion in Hydrocarbon Exploration: Theory and Applications”, In: “Integrated maging of the Earth: Theory and Applications”, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, vol. 218, pp. 167-189, Apr. 22, 2016 (2… [cited by applicant]
Colombo et al.; “Coupled physics-deep learning inversion”, Computers & Geosciences; vol. 157; Aug. 25, 2021; pp. 1-13 (13 pages). [cited by applicant]
He et al.; “Physics-informed neural networks for multiphysics data assimilation with application to subsurface transport”, Advances in Water Resources; vol. 141; May 6, 2020; pp. 1-15 (15 pages). [cited by applicant]
Sun et al.; “Physics-guided deep learning for seismic inversion with hybrid training and uncertainty analysis”, Geophysics; vol. 86; Issue 3; May 2021; pp. R303-R317 (15 pages). [cited by applicant]
Ray, A. and Myer, D.; “Bayesian geophysical inversion with trans-dimensional Gaussian process machine learning”, Geophysical Journal International; vol. 217; Feb. 28, 2019; pp. 1706-1726 (21 pages). [cited by applicant]
Berger et al.; “A Survey of Active Learning for Quantifying Vegetation Traits from Terrestial Earth Obersvation Data”, Remote Sensing; vol. 13; No. 2; 287; pp. 1-23 (23 pages), Year: 2021. [cited by applicant]
Moss, Adam; “Accelerated Bayesian inference using deep learning”, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society; vol. 496; May 2020; pp. 1-12 (12 pages). [cited by applicant]
Hannouch, E. H. and Holmstedt, O.; “Deep-learning-accelerated Bayesian inference for state-space models”, Master's thesis in Mathematics; Chalmers University of Technology; 2020 (91 pages). [cited by applicant]
Hooten et al.; “Making Recursive Bayesian Inference Accessible”, The American Statistician; vol. 75; No. 2; Sep. 2019 (10 pages). [cited by applicant]