2.

2 Reparameterization based on prior knowledge

In zonation, the basis vectors (A in Eq. 1) are piecewise
constant functions. For the pilot point method the ith
basis vector is CM(x - xi) where xi is the location of
the ith pilot point and CM(x - xi) is the covariance of
model parameters at x with model parameters at xi.
Other types of basis vectors A that have been used
for history matching include spline function, wavelet
function, leading eigenvectors of the covariance matrix
of model variables CM and discrete cosine transform.
For the pilot point method, the values of the rock
property fields at the pilot points are the parameters
to be determined through history matching. Values of
the properties at other locations are found by kriging
interpolation. One key issue for implementation
of the pilot point method is the determination of the
proper number of pilot points and the optimal locations.
In the first application to groundwater hydrology,
de Marsily et al. [41] located the pilot points moreor-
less uniformly but also attempted to follow zones
of large transmissivity contrasts. LaVenue and Pickens
[93] located pilot points in regions of highest sensitivity.
One or two pilot points were added at each iteration,
the transmissivity was adjusted, and then if the
residual was still large, more pilot points were added.
Transmissivity at the pilot points were constrained to
lie within prescribed bounds. Wen et al. [177] located
the pilot points at randomly selected locations in such
a way that there was approximately one pilot point
per correlation length. This was done iteratively, and
the locations were changed at each iteration. Bissell
et al. [21] used sensitivity information computed using
the direct method to compute optimal locations for
placement of pilot points. In a more recent publication,
Wen et al. [178] used a genetic algorithm to search for
optimal pilot point locations, as well as the associated
optimal permeability perturbations at the pilot locations.
Because the basis vectors are rows of the prior covariance
matrix, it has been argued that regularization
is not necessary with the pilot points method [184], but
McLaughlin and Townley [116] point out that the lack
of a regularization term could result in instability. The
practical advantage of a Tykhonov-type regularization
on constraining pilot point calibration was illustrated by
Fienen et al. [53]. Liu and Oliver [107] showed that pilot
point methods tend to result in anomalous distributions
of extreme values in history matching problems, but
that the problem is reduced when regularization is used.
Spline bases have also been used in history matching
to represent either the property field to be estimated
or the change to the property field [44, 114]. Lee et al.
[97] used bicubic splines to parameterize estimates of
permeability and porosity distributions from well pressure
data in a single-phase, two-dimensional reservoir.
Lee and Seinfeld [99] extended the methodology to
the problem of estimation of permeability in a twophase,
two-dimensional reservoir from well pressure
data. The bicubic spline representation of the change
to the parameter field is less likely to result in visual
artifacts that are sometimes seen in pilot point and
zonation parameterizations [see 116, Fig. 3] or [see 131,
Fig. 9.2]. On the other hand, the spline parameterization
is flexible enough to be used for piecewise smooth
representation of reservoir properties [37].
For random fields with a known covariance, a basis
formed from the spectral (eigenvalue/eigenvector)
decomposition of the prior model covariance can be
efficient for history matching. Reynolds et al. [138]
showed that use of the KarhunenLoeve reparameterization
significantly decreased the computational
effort required to generate realizations of the reservoir
model conditioned to multiwell pressure data. Similar
approaches to reparameterization have been used by
Sarma et al. [147] and Zhang et al. [190]. Romary
[141] discussed a method for determining the number
of terms to be kept in a truncated KarhunenLoeve
expansion. The discrete cosine transform has been used
as a parameterization by Jafarpour and McLaughlin
[86] and Jafarpour et al. [85]