Topological analysis in Monte Carlo simulation for uncertainty propagation

Abstract. This paper proposes and demonstrates improvements for the Monte Carlo simulation for uncertainty propagation (MCUP) method. MCUP is a type of Bayesian Monte Carlo method aimed at input data uncertainty propagation in implicit 3-D geological modeling. In the Monte Carlo process, a series of statistically plausible models is built from the input dataset of which uncertainty is to be propagated to a final probabilistic geological model or uncertainty index model. Significant differences in terms of topology are observed in the plausible model suite that is generated as an intermediary step in MCUP. These differences are interpreted as analogous to population heterogeneity. The source of this heterogeneity is traced to be the non-linear relationship between plausible datasets' variability and plausible model's variability. Non-linearity is shown to mainly arise from the effect of the geometrical rule set on model building which transforms lithological continuous interfaces into discontinuous piecewise ones. Plausible model heterogeneity induces topological heterogeneity and challenges the underlying assumption of homogeneity which global uncertainty estimates rely on. To address this issue, a method for topological analysis applied to the plausible model suite in MCUP is introduced. Boolean topological signatures recording lithological unit adjacency are used as n -dimensional points to be considered individually or clustered using the density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise (DBSCAN) algorithm. The proposed method is tested on two challenging synthetic examples with varying levels of confidence in the structural input data. Results indicate that topological signatures constitute a powerful discriminant to address plausible model heterogeneity. Basic topological signatures appear to be a reliable indicator of the structural behavior of the plausible models and provide useful geological insights. Moreover, ignoring heterogeneity was found to be detrimental to the accuracy and relevance of the probabilistic geological models and uncertainty index models. Highlights. Monte Carlo uncertainty propagation (MCUP) methods often produce topologically distinct plausible models. Plausible models can be differentiated using topological signatures. Topologically similar probabilistic geological models may be obtained through topological signature clustering.

[1]  Mark Lindsay,et al.  Monte Carlo simulation for uncertainty estimation on structural data in implicit 3-D geological modeling, a guide for disturbance distribution selection and parameterization , 2018 .

[2]  Peter G. Lelièvre,et al.  Physical-property-, lithology- and surface-geometry-based joint inversion using Pareto Multi-Objective Global Optimization , 2017 .

[3]  H. Omre,et al.  Stochastic Models for Seismic Depth Conversion of Geological Horizons , 1991 .

[4]  M. Jessell,et al.  Locating and quantifying geological uncertainty in three-dimensional models: Analysis of the Gippsland Basin, southeastern Australia , 2012 .

[5]  Hans-Peter Kriegel,et al.  A Density-Based Algorithm for Discovering Clusters in Large Spatial Databases with Noise , 1996, KDD.

[6]  Hui Wang,et al.  A Segmentation Approach for Stochastic Geological Modeling Using Hidden Markov Random Fields , 2017, Mathematical Geosciences.

[7]  Sisi Zlatanova On 3D topological relationships , 2000, Proceedings 11th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications.

[8]  Keith Beven,et al.  The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. , 1992 .

[9]  Peter R. King,et al.  Our calibrated model has poor predictive value: An example from the petroleum industry , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[10]  Daniel Schweizer,et al.  Uncertainty assessment in 3-D geological models of increasing complexity , 2017 .

[11]  J. Chilès,et al.  Geostatistics: Modeling Spatial Uncertainty , 1999 .

[12]  A. Khrennikov,et al.  From axiomatics of quantum probability to modelling geological uncertainty and management of intelligent hydrocarbon reservoirs with the theory of open quantum systems , 2018, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[13]  Guillaume Caumon,et al.  Elements for measuring the complexity of 3D structural models: Connectivity and geometry , 2015, Comput. Geosci..

[14]  J. Wellmann,et al.  Uncertainties have a meaning: Information entropy as a quality measure for 3-D geological models , 2012 .

[15]  Samuel T. Thiele,et al.  The topology of geology 2: Topological uncertainty , 2016 .

[16]  G. Caumon,et al.  Sampling the uncertainty associated with segmented normal fault interpretation using a stochastic downscaling method , 2015 .

[17]  Richard W. Hamming,et al.  Error detecting and error correcting codes , 1950 .

[18]  X. Emery,et al.  Geostatistical modeling of the geological uncertainty in an iron ore deposit , 2017 .

[19]  J. Chilès,et al.  3D Geological Modelling and Uncertainty: The Potential-field Method , 2005 .

[20]  J. Florian Wellmann,et al.  pynoddy 1.0: an experimental platform for automated 3-D kinematic and potential field modelling , 2015 .

[21]  C. Bond,et al.  LiDAR, UAV or compass-clinometer? Accuracy, coverage and the effects on structural models , 2017 .

[22]  R. Lark,et al.  A statistical assessment of the uncertainty in a 3-D geological framework model , 2013 .

[23]  Zhangxin Chen,et al.  A framework for assisted history matching and robust optimization of low salinity waterflooding under geological uncertainties , 2017 .

[24]  Guillaume Caumon,et al.  3-D Structural geological models: Concepts, methods, and uncertainties , 2018 .

[25]  Regularized tomographic inversion with geological constraints , 2017 .

[26]  M. Jessell,et al.  Making the link between geological and geophysical uncertainty: geodiversity in the Ashanti Greenstone Belt , 2013 .

[27]  Martin Stigsson Orientation Uncertainty of Structures Measured in Cored Boreholes: Methodology and Case Study of Swedish Crystalline Rock , 2016, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.

[28]  M. Clark,et al.  A philosophical basis for hydrological uncertainty , 2016 .

[29]  P. Ledru,et al.  Geological modelling from field data and geological knowledge. Part II. Modelling validation using gravity and magnetic data inversion , 2008 .

[30]  János Fodor,et al.  Traditional and New Ways to Handle Uncertainty in Geology , 2001 .

[31]  J. Florian Wellmann,et al.  Validating 3-D structural models with geological knowledge for improved uncertainty evaluations , 2014 .

[32]  Roland Martin,et al.  Uncertainty reduction through geologically conditioned petrophysical constraints in joint inversion , 2017 .

[33]  Roland Martin,et al.  Integration of geoscientific uncertainty into geophysical inversion by means of local gradient regularization , 2019, Solid Earth.

[34]  Sanjay Chakraborty,et al.  Performance Comparison of Incremental K-means and Incremental DBSCAN Algorithms , 2014, ArXiv.

[35]  Lucie Nováková,et al.  Assessment of the precision of smart phones and tablets for measurement of planar orientations: A case study , 2017 .

[36]  Samuel T. Thiele,et al.  The topology of geology 1: Topological analysis , 2016 .

[37]  Hans-Peter Kriegel,et al.  DBSCAN Revisited, Revisited , 2017, ACM Trans. Database Syst..

[38]  B. Lévy,et al.  Stochastic simulations of fault networks in 3D structural modeling. , 2010 .

[39]  J. Wellmann,et al.  Structural geologic modeling as an inference problem: A Bayesian perspective , 2016 .

[41]  J. Chilès,et al.  Modelling the geometry of geological units and its uncertainty in 3D from structural data: The potential-field method , 2007 .

[42]  J. Chilès,et al.  Geological modelling from field data and geological knowledge. Part I. Modelling method coupling 3D potential-field interpolation and geological rules , 2008 .

[43]  M. Jessell Three-dimensional geological modelling of potential-field data , 2001 .

[44]  M. Jessell,et al.  Drillhole uncertainty propagation for three-dimensional geological modeling using Monte Carlo , 2018, Tectonophysics.

[45]  A. Guilléna,et al.  Geological modelling from field data and geological knowledge Part II . Modelling validation using gravity and magnetic data inversion , 2008 .

[46]  J. Florian Wellmann,et al.  Information Theory for Correlation Analysis and Estimation of Uncertainty Reduction in Maps and Models , 2013, Entropy.