Demonstrates a Bayesian model to identify pore spaces in carbonate reservoirs, suggesting improved accuracy for reservoir prediction.
Aiming at the challenges in accurately identifying complex pore-space types, significant scale variations, and overlapping log responses in carbonate reservoirs, this study takes the Jurassic Da’anzhai Member in the central Sichuan Basin as the research object. By integrating core observations, cast thin sections, scanning electron microscopy, and well log data, the genetic types and log response characteristics of pore spaces at different scales are systematically analyzed. Building on this, a multivariate distribution identification model for pore-space scales is established based on Bayesian discriminant theory. To enhance the model’s identification accuracy, Z-score normalization is introduced to eliminate dimensional differences. Nonlinear combined features, such as the ratio of the compensated acoustic log (AC) to the gamma ray log (GR) and the logarithmic difference between deep and shallow resistivity logs (RT and RI), are constructed to achieve a multidimensional coupling representation of reservoir physical properties; a class-balancing augmentation method based on Gaussian perturbation is adopted to mitigate decision bias caused by sample imbalance. The results show that the improved Bayesian model achieves F1 scores exceeding 0.80 for large-, small-, and micro-scale pore spaces, with an overall identification accuracy of 84.38%, significantly outperforming the conventional crossplot method’s accuracy of 59.38%. Validation through experiments and well log data demonstrates that the model’s identification results are consistent with core and thin-section observations, indicating that this method can effectively identify large-, small-, and micro-scale pore spaces in strongly heterogeneous carbonate reservoirs. This study provides a valuable approach for reservoir log interpretation and favorable reservoir prediction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: