Geology topics

H.-C. Chang

Publications and source records attributed to H.-C. Chang.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2007

A critical assessment of the Burning Index in Los Angeles County, California

The Burning Index (BI) is commonly used as a predictor of wildfire activity. An examination of data on the BI and wildfires in Los Angeles County, California, from January 1976 to December 2000 reveals that although the BI is positively associated with wildfire occurrence, its predictive value is quite limited. Wind speed alone has a higher correlation with burn area than BI, for instance, and a simple alternative point process model using wind speed, relative humidity, precipitation and temperature well outperforms the BI in terms of predictive power. The BI is generally far too high in winter and too low in fall, and may exaggerate the impact of individual variables such as wind speed or temperature during times when other variables, such as precipitation or relative humidity, render the environment ill suited for wildfires. ?? IAWF 2007.

International Journal of Wildland Fire↗

USGS2002

Identification of lithofacies using Kohonen self-organizing maps

Lithofacies identification is a primary task in reservoir characterization. Traditional techniques of lithofacies identification from core data are costly, and it is difficult to extrapolate to non-cored wells. We present a low-cost automated technique using Kohonen self-organizing maps (SOMs) to identify systematically and objectively lithofacies from well log data. SOMs are unsupervised artificial neural networks that map the input space into clusters in a topological form whose organization is related to trends in the input data. A case study used five wells located in Appleton Field, Escambia County, Alabama (Smackover Formation, limestone and dolomite, Oxfordian, Jurassic). A five-input, one-dimensional output approach is employed, assuming the lithofacies are in ascending/descending order with respect to paleoenvironmental energy levels. To consider the possible appearance of new logfacies not seen in training mode, which may potentially appear in test wells, the maximum number of outputs is set to 20 instead of four, the designated number of lithosfacies in the study area. This study found eleven major clusters. The clusters were compared to depositional lithofacies identified by manual core examination. The clusters were ordered by the SOM in a pattern consistent with environmental gradients inferred from core examination: bind/boundstone, grainstone, packstone, and wackestone. This new approach predicted lithofacies identity from well log data with 78.8% accuracy which is more accurate than using a backpropagation neural network (57.3%). The clusters produced by the SOM are ordered with respect to paleoenvironmental energy levels. This energy-related clustering provides geologists and petroleum engineers with valuable geologic information about the logfacies and their interrelationships. This advantage is not obtained in backpropagation neural networks and adaptive resonance theory neural networks. ?? 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Computers & Geosciences↗

USGS2000

Lithofacies identification using multiple adaptive resonance theory neural networks and group decision expert system

Lithofacies identification supplies qualitative information about rocks. Lithofacies represent rock textures and are important components of hydrocarbon reservoir description. Traditional techniques of lithofacies identification from core data are costly and different geologists may provide different interpretations. In this paper, we present a low-cost intelligent system consisting of three adaptive resonance theory neural networks and a rule-based expert system to consistently and objectively identify lithofacies from well-log data. The input data are altered into different forms representing different perspectives of observation of lithofacies. Each form of input is processed by a different adaptive resonance theory neural network. Among these three adaptive resonance theory neural networks, one neural network processes the raw continuous data, another processes categorial data, and the third processes fuzzy-set data. Outputs from these three networks are then combined by the expert system using fuzzy inference to determine to which facies the input data should be assigned. Rules are prioritized to emphasize the importance of firing order. This new approach combines the learning ability of neural networks, the adaptability of fuzzy logic, and the expertise of geologists to infer facies of the rocks. This approach is applied to the Appleton Field, an oil field located in Escambia County, Alabama. The hybrid intelligence system predicts lithofacies identity from log data with 87.6% accuracy. This prediction is more accurate than those of single adaptive resonance theory networks, 79.3%, 68.0% and 66.0%, using raw, fuzzy-set, and categorical data, respectively, and by an error-backpropagation neural network, 57.3%. (C) 2000 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Computers & Geosciences↗