PETROPHYSICS, VOL. 60, NO. 4 (AUGUST 2019); PAGES 469–479; 9 FIGURES. DOI: 10.

30632/PJV60N4-2019a1

A Machine-Learning-Based Approach to Assistive Well-Log Correlation1

Seth Brazell2, Alex Bayeh2, Michael Ashby2, Darrin Burton3

ABSTRACT

The process of well-log correlation requires signi¿cant
time and expertise from the interpreter, is often subjective
and can be a bottleneck to many subsurface characterization
workÀows. Algorithmic approaches to well-to-well
correlation suffer from the inherent heterogeneity of
geophysical measurements in the wellbore, both from a
geologic and data-quality perspective. We demonstrate a
rigorous and repeatable method for well-log correlation
by deploying a correlation tool that leverages a machine-
learning model for pattern matching between well logs
and programmed stratigraphic correlation techniques. A
supervised-learning approach was used to train a novel
deep convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture
using over ¿ve million data samples, which were derived
from thousands of well logs and expert interpreted
correlations. To ensure that a robust pattern-matching
model was trained, well logs from several US onshore
basins with various tectonic regimes and environments of
deposition were used to construct training and validation
datasets. The result is a universal model for pattern
matching of wireline measurements that can incorporate
multiple geophysical-log signals as input data and can be
deployed at scale without the need for retraining. Overall,
the pattern-matching model was able to achieve a level
of accuracy of 96.6% and classi¿cation area-under-the-
curve (AUC) of 0.954 on a separate validation dataset. The
universal deep CNN is one component of the correlation
tool. Algorithmic three-dimensional search logic was
constructed around the deep CNN model which determines
the optimal correlation and marker propagation pathway.
Rules-based criteria have also been applied to the model
output ensuring conformance to stratigraphic principles
including preserving stratigraphic order and honoring
present-day structural trends. We present several examples
to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of this machine-
learning-based approach to well-log correlation which can
be used to ef¿ciently generate high-density datasets for
regional exploration, development mapping and reservoir
characterization exercises.

INTRODUCTION time-consuming, manual approaches to well-log correlation

Well-log correlation is a critical component of many
geoscience workÀows. Attempts to develop automated or
computer-assisted well-log correlation tools have been
well documented since the 1970s (Rudman and Lankson,
1973; Mann and Dowell, 1978). Previous approaches have
relied on auto- and cross-correlation techniques (Mann and
Dowell, 1978; Wu, et al., 2018) and dynamic time warping
(DTW) functions (Lineman et al., 1987; Fang et al., 1992)
while more recently developed tools use neural networks
of varying complexity (Baldwin et al., 1989; Luthi and
Bryant, 1997; Maniar et al., 2018). Several of these previous
approaches have shown only marginal reliability in real-world
applications and many have limited utility at scale without
signi¿cant time and resources devoted to data preprocessing.
As a result, many geoscience professionals must rely on
and formation tops digitization, which becomes a bottleneck
to more advanced interpretation and petrophysical analysis.
The reliance of manual-only correlation workÀows limits
the ability of industry professionals to harness all available
well-log data in order to reduce subsurface uncertainty.
In this paper, we provide examples of a novel, computer-
assisted well-log correlation workÀow that uses the latest
advancements in arti¿cial intelligence and high-performance
computing. We have developed a deep convolutional neural
network (CNN) to identify patterns between well logs and a
marker-propagation tool trained on expert correlations from
a multitude of basins and depositional environments across
the US Lower 48. Training datasets consisted of expert-
generated correlation examples from shallow-marine, deep-
marine, carbonate platform and lacustrine depositional
environments preserved in extensional and compressional

Manuscript received by the Editor May 8, 2019; revised manuscript received July 10, 2019; manuscript accepted July 11, 2019.
1
Originally presented at the Houston Geological Society Applied Geoscience Conference, February 2019.
2
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, 1201 Lake Robbins Drive, The Woodlands, TX 77380; seth.brazell@anadarko.com; alex.bayeh@anadarko.com;
michael.ashby@anadarko.com
3
Geo Southern Energy, 1425 Lake Front Circle #200, The Woodlands, TX 77380; 1darrinburton@gmail.com

469 PETROPHYSICS August 2019

 A Machine-Learning-Based Approach to Assistive Well-Log Correlation
regimes. The deep CNN model and marker-propagation
tool, referred to here as the “correlation tool”, is cloud
enabled with the ability to extend and propagate a sparse set
of interpreter-generated correlations at scale, across datasets
containing tens of thousands of well logs in a fraction of the
time necessary to complete the same correlations manually.
We provide examples from a stratigraphic correlation
exercise to highlight the tool’s ability to correlate markers on
a moderate to high well-density dataset from the Anadarko
Basin which contains distinctive log motifs in addition to
structural and stratigraphic complexity.
The primary challenges faced by every algorithmic
approach to correlation are (1) data-quality issues (e.g.,
missing or otherwise erroneous geophysical measurements
and investigation depth window continuity), and (2)
geologic complexity (e.g., lateral heterogeneity including
missing section, pinchout, interval thickness variability,
etc.). In addition to requiring normalized logs as input data,
many published and commercially available correlation
tools require the depth search window for all wells to have
precise starting and ending points. This may assume an
initial correlation exists for all wells and is a challenge for
wells with log measurements that do not cover the entire
interval of interest. However, as interpreters are faced with
correlating ever larger datasets, manual-only correlations
and the preprocessing required to use previously mentioned
programmatic correlation workÀows becomes a prohibitively
time-consuming task. As data density is a primary control on
an interpreter’s ability to con¿dently correlate well logs in
areas of lateral heterogeneity, it is essential for the interpreter
to leverage all available data. Therefore, a useful correlation
tool must have the ability to ingest data with some degree
of quality variability in addition to having the Àexibility to
recognize and adapt to subtle changes in signal character
between well logs and with distance.
The presence of geologic complexity is often a barrier
for programmatic approaches to well-log correlation that
requires human intervention and is a challenge that is not
entirely mitigated with the proposed approach. While many
of the challenges encountered during well-log correlation
exercises are not easily addressed programmatically, the
complexity of the problem is well suited for machine-
learning techniques.
In order to address these challenges, we have used a
supervised-learning approach to construct a deep CNN
model that is able to recognize patterns in petrophysical-
log motifs between multiple wellbores. A deep CNN is
a type of arti¿cial neural network (ANN) that has a wide
range of applications, including: pattern recognition, image
classi¿cation and edge detection. CNNs are especially
useful for addressing complex problems for which our
August 2019 PETROPHYSICS
theoretical physics-based understandings are incomplete.
Unlike traditional, deterministic approaches to problem
solving, deep-learning algorithms (a subset of machine
learning) deploy many layers of nonlinear ¿lters to generate
multidimensional abstractions of the data in order to
extract and classify patterns and structures that correspond
to labeled training data. Our deep CNN classi¿es images
derived from digital log ASCII standard (LAS) ¿les of well-
log comparisons into two classes, match or no match. To
train the model for this type of classi¿cation, we use binary
cross-entropy (CE) as the loss function,
(1)
where it is assumed that there are two classes: C1 and C2. t1 ࣅ
[0,1] and s1 are the ground truth and the score for C1, and t2
= 1 í t1 and s2 = 1 – s1 are the ground truth and the score for
C2 and f () is the sigmoid function.
Massively large training and validation datasets
are required to provide the neural network with enough
experience to correctly weight the ¿lters that will generate
an accurate solution (Krizhevsky et al., 2017). Similar to the
complex neural connections in the brain, the resultant trained
deep CNN model is a complex network of data abstraction
¿lters and functions that can generate highly accurate results.
The model compares markers de¿ned within interpreter-
generated “seed wells” as an initial reference for log motif,
structural and isopach trends.
The pattern-matching CNN model is further constrained
by programmed correlation techniques, fundamental
geologic heuristics and user-de¿ned rules, which seek to
reduce the number of false positive correlations and control
propagation. In any cyclic succession of strata, similar
wireline-log motifs or patterns may occur multiple times
throughout the length of a borehole. In order to prevent cycle
skipping the user can effectively vary the size of the vertical
search window in order to gain more context for pattern
matching. Additionally, rules that are meant to minimize
correlation ambiguity must be adhered to by the propagation
logic, including the rules that tops must not cross and any
pick must conform to user-de¿ned isopachous and structural
conformance trends identi¿ed in the seed wells. In areas
of more rapid lateral changes the user can constrain the
neighboring-well search distance, while in areas of more
gradually changing geology this search distance can be
increased.
Here, we provide examples from a moderate well-
density dataset comprising ~550 vertical wells from the
STACK play in the northeastern Anadarko Basin (Fig.
470
 Brazell et al.

1) to highlight the strengths and weaknesses in the tool’s

correlation performance. The workÀow (Fig. 2) begins by
having an interpreter provide correlated tops (seed wells)
across a small fraction of the overall dataset. The universal
pattern-matching CNN does not need to be retrained,
however, it does need examples of the tops of interest in
order to begin propagation. The interpreter should provide
enough examples to adequately characterize the scale of
subsurface heterogeneity and then can rely on the correlation
tool to in¿ll the remaining correlations. No log normalization
or preprocessing of gamma-ray or deep-resistivity well-
log data needs to be completed prior to ingestion into the
correlation tool. The tool was designed to ingest more
commonly available gamma-ray and deep-resistivity log
measurements; however, any log measurement may be used.
After providing the tool with LAS ¿les, borehole location
information and seed wells, the user can tune the search and
Fig. 1—Location map of the Anadarko Basin and area of interest (black
propagation parameters to values most suited for the area of square) in King¿sher County, Oklahoma, in the STACK play.
interest. Once results are generated they can be imported into
any subsurface interpretation platform for QC and further
analysis. Deep CNN Model Training and Validation
METHODS A deep CNN was trained to recognize similar gamma-
ray and deep-resistivity log motifs and character between
A supervised-learning approach was adopted to develop two well logs when read from digital LAS ¿les, rather than
a deep CNN with the ability to match log motifs and patterns speci¿c formations, so that it can be rapidly applied to new
between sections of two different well logs using primarily basins of interest without the need for additional training. To
gamma-ray and resistivity measurements. Previous correlate two well logs, the deep CNN is employed using a
applications of deep CNNs for geoscience interpretation proprietary search function that is systematically applied to
have shown that training on actual ¿eld examples is a both well logs and produces a probability score, between 0
superior approach for feature recognition versus training and 1, that the sections of logs being compared are a match
on synthetic data examples (Morris et al., 2018). Gamma- (Fig. 3). We believe this method provides an advantage over
ray and resistivity log measurements were selected for their formation-speci¿c machine-learning approaches, as it can
ubiquitous availability. However, the deep CNN has been robustly handle changing log motifs across the basin.
shown to be able to successfully operate on nearly any Accurate CNN model building requires a signi¿cantly
geophysical log that has suf¿cient log character. large dataset (on the order of thousands to millions of data

Fig. 2—Schematic workÀow describing the data inputs required for the correlation tool to output probabilistic, deep-learning-generated formation
tops correlations. Input data comprising raw LAS and surface X-Y or latitude-longitude data for every well in the dataset and a subset of interpreter-
generated tops within seed wells (generally 1 to 3% of the overall dataset). Input data are ingested by the correlation tool and outputs probabilistic
tops correlations based on user-de¿ned parameters that constrain the correlation logic

471 PETROPHYSICS August 2019

 A Machine-Learning-Based Approach to Assistive Well-Log Correlation

Fig. 3—Match-probability matrix generated by a comparison of two well logs by the correlation tool’s deep CNN. Areas of match probabilities near one
(red) indicate areas where the two well logs are highly correlated, while areas of match probabilities near zero (blue) indicate no perceived correlation.

points), which represents a signi¿cant challenge for problems
that require manually generated labels. To perform accurate
correlations, the deep CNN, built using TensorFlow, was
trained and validated on approximately ¿ve million data
samples prepared from expert correlations from multiple
depositional environments and basins across the US Lower
48. Legacy and contemporary correlation examples were
leveraged from several geoscience interpreters to develop a
training and validation dataset comprising over 33,000 unique
formation and surface tops from over 3,300 wellbores. It was
essential that these expert correlations used for training data
were manually vetted by experienced interpreters to be as
precise and consistent as possible. This quality-control step,
while not a trivial undertaking, is a requirement in order to
allow the deep CNN to effectively learn how to recognize
patterns between well logs.
In order to successfully pose the problem for a
machine-learning solution, a dataset containing geophysical
measurements formation tops must be transformed into
a set of correlation and noncorrelation sample pairs (Fig.
4). A training dataset of several thousand logs and tens
of thousands of formation tops, when transformed in this
fashion, generated over ¿ve million samples which were
then used for robust training and validation of a deep CNN.
When constructing the training and validation dataset we
limited correlation and noncorrelation pairs to an appropriate
horizontal distance given the lateral continuity of strata
in a given area of interest. The data from each basin were
further segmented into a 4:1 ratio of training to validation
sample pairs. The training dataset was randomly selected
and comprising approximately four million samples and
the validation dataset contained approximately one million
samples. The number of noncorrelation samples was an order
of magnitude larger than the number of correlation samples
in the training and validation datasets, therefore biasing the
training dataset towards noncorrelation.

August 2019 PETROPHYSICS 472


Fig. 4—Example of (a) noncorrelation, and (b) correlation sample pairs that comprise the approximately ¿ve million sample training set and used to
train and validate the universal deep CNN pattern-recognition model component of the correlation tool.
The result of this effort is a universal deep CNN that is
able to quantify the match probability between sections of
two different well logs, even if the model has never been
exposed to the dataset of interest. Overall, the pattern-
matching model was able to achieve a level of accuracy
of 96.6% and classi¿cation area-under-the-curve (AUC)
of 0.954 on a separate validation dataset. It is important to
note that if there is insuf¿cient log character or ambiguity in
the provided seed data, the deep CNN will have dif¿culties
producing high-con¿dence predictions.
Correlation Tool Framework
Once log motifs and patterns are probabilistically
matched between two wells using the deep CNN, interpreter-
generated formation tops can be propagated from the seed
well to the new well (Fig. 5). While a high match-probability
score generated by the CNN is necessary for correlation, it
is not suf¿cient to ensure the marker is correctly propagated
to a neighboring well. Cyclic depositional phenomenon
may generate recurring log motifs and patterns throughout a
473
Brazell et al.
vertical section of the subsurface. This may result in multiple
high match-probability scores being generated at various
locations throughout a neighboring well log. Standard
correlation principles and techniques are programmatically
written around the deep-learning pattern-recognition
model in order to mitigate the possibility of false positive
correlation results from the tool. The correlation tool
programmatically generates derivative logs from the original
LAS ¿les, and seamlessly handles additional preprocessing
steps automatically where are necessary to standardize and
transform the data prior to ingestion into the deep CNN
model. In addition to the preprocessing, the correlation tool
determines the well-to-well correlation path using kernel
density estimation, and continuously updates this correlation
path as new tops are identi¿ed. Multiprocessing has been
used to enhance the performance of the propagation tool
by dividing the basin into equal well-density sections (the
number of sections is currently speci¿ed by the user), and
running the deep CNN in parallel in each section.
PETROPHYSICS August 2019
 A Machine-Learning-Based Approach to Assistive Well-Log Correlation
Fig. 5—Well-to-well correlation occurs when the marker formation top
from the seed-well log (solid horizontal line in well log on the left) and the
surrounding log character (light-gray box) is compared to a neighboring-
well log (center). The correlation tool’s deep CNN identi¿es the depth of
the highest match probability (right) along the new well and suggests the
most likely location for correlation (dashed back line).
Correlation Tool Deployment
To run the correlation tool in a basin, the user provides a
small list of seed wells containing formation tops of interest
(typically 1 to 3% of the total dataset) in addition to surface
location data and LAS ¿les for all wells in the dataset (Fig.
2). The correlation tool will then search for and correlate
these user-de¿ned formation tops in neighboring wells via
targeted search windows based on dynamic estimations of
formation thicknesses and structural strike and dip trends.
The three-dimensional area of investigation of the search
window is controlled via user inputs that can account for
the data density and geologic complexities of the area of
interest (AOI). Using an iterative approach, a distinctive
and regionally extensive marker can be correlated across
thousands of wells with only a handful of initial seed wells.
We selected a moderate to high well-density portion
of the Anadarko Basin in King¿sher County, Oklahoma,
to highlight the correlation tool’s capabilities (Fig. 6).
Approximately 550 mostly vertical wells with gamma and
resistivity logs were selected within the ~900 mi2 area of
King¿sher County. Within the AOI, six distinctive marker
August 2019 PETROPHYSICS
beds and unconformities within the late Ordovician to
late Mississippian section were selected for correlation
(Fig. 6), including the tops of Chester/post-Mississippian
unconformity, Meramec, Woodford, Hunton, Sylvian and
Viola Formations. The Ordovician to Mississippian section
within King¿sher County was chosen due to its distinctive
log motifs and subsurface heterogeneity. Portions of the
Silurian Hunton Formation are unconformably overlain
by the Devonian Woodford formation. and the middle to
late Mississippian Meramec and Chester Formations are
unconformably overlain by post-Mississippian clastics.
The Chester Formation rapidly thins towards the northeast,
where it is completely removed by the post-Mississippian
unconformity (Fig. 7).
Fig. 6—Type log and location map of area of interest in King¿sher
County, Oklahoma. The dataset comprises 550 mostly vertical or near-
vertical wells with gamma-ray and deep-resistivity geophysical log
measurements over an area of ~900 mi2. Formation tops of interest
are from the Ordovician to Mississippian section including tops of the
Chester, Meramec, Woodford, Hunton, Sylvan and Viola Formations.
While the tops of six formations were simultaneously
correlated across the basin using the deep CNN-based
correlation tool, this paper focuses on the top of the Meramec
marker. Twenty well logs distributed across the basin (Fig.
8a) were correlated manually and used as initial seed-
well inputs for the correlation tool. The initial seed wells
were selected to represent the geologic variability present
in the AOI, including changes in structural dip, formation
thicknesses and log character. A top of Meramec structure
map was created using the initial seed wells as control points
and a minimum curvature gridding algorithm. Changes in
top of Meramec structure were tracked as additional wells
were correlated after two iterations using the correlation tool
(Figs. 8b and 8c).
474
 Brazell et al.

Fig. 7—Dip-oriented cross section of late Ordovician to late Mississippian formations across King¿sher County, Oklahoma. Posted well logs comprise
gamma-ray (green curve) and deep-resistivity (red curve) measurements. Seed wells are marked with a black star at the top of the log and were used
as inputs for the correlation tool. Initial seed tops markers are the black lines within the seed wells. Colored tops (red = Chester; orange = Meramec;
yellow = Woodford; green = Hunton; blue = Sylvan; violet = Viola) were generated by the correlation tool.

RESULTS distinctive, regionally extensive tops including the top

Twenty manually correlated seed wells, containing
interpretations for all six formations (Fig. 6), were used as
inputs for the ¿rst iteration of the correlation tool. Focusing
on the top of the Meramec, these seed wells represent only
3.6% of the total dataset. The ¿rst iteration of the correlation
tool generated 2,018 formation tops of which 457 tops were
the top of the Meramec. This uplift by the correlation tool
represents 84.0% of the dataset interpreted for the top of the
Meramec. The total computation time for the ¿rst iteration
was 9.45 minutes. Structure maps were generated to identify
any obvious mis-ties and the results from the ¿rst iteration
were incorporated with the initial 20 seed wells as inputs for
the second iteration. The second iteration of the correlation
tool yielded 377 new tops picks, 52 of which were Meramec
Formation tops. This uplift was an additional 9.6% of the
dataset for the top of the Meramec, culminating in a total
of 93.6% of the dataset having correlated Meramec tops.
The total computation time for the second iteration was 1.6
minutes. Figure 7 shows a cross-section transect of the AOI,
Àattened on the top of the Meramec, which highlights the
accuracy of the correlation tool. The tool is able to correlate
of the Viola, Sylvan, Woodford and Meramec, as well as
unconformities surfaces including the top of the Hunton and
Chester.
With an initial input of ~100 marker bed picks in 20 seed
wells, the correlation tool generated 2,095 correlations in
~550 wells in 11.15 minutes. If the initial manual correlation
task required 45 minutes for an interpreter to complete, the
correlation tool represents an 80-fold ef¿ciency increase,
in addition to providing a quantitative measurement of the
correlation uncertainty.
DISCUSSION
The Deep CNN match-probability matrix (Fig. 3)
highlights several of the tool’s strengths and weaknesses.
Match probability is near 1.0 along correlatable sections for
the two wells at depth ranges of 1,000 to í1,250 ft and below
í6,000 ft where the wells have a distinctive log character for
both gamma and resistivity. There are more diffuse match
probabilities along depth ranges + 200 to í800 ft, í1,300
to í3,900 ft, and í4,400 to í5,700 ft. However, match-
probability peaks are large enough to differentiate true from

475 PETROPHYSICS August 2019

 A Machine-Learning-Based Approach to Assistive Well-Log Correlation

Fig. 8—Top of Meramec Formation structure maps. Uncorrelated wells are represented by black symbols. Correlated well are highlighted with a
magenta circle. (a) Meramec structure map using 20 manually correlated seed wells. (b) Meramec structure maps using 457 tops generated by the
correlation tool after one iteration. (c) Meramec structure map using 509 tops generated after the second iteration of the correlation tool.

false positive correlations between wells. The distribution
of match probabilities in Fig. 3 highlights the importance
of marker bed, or tops selection for use as initial seed data
when using the correlation tool. Tops with a distinctive
log character have the highest likelihood of correlation
using the tool. A well-to-well match-probability matrix can
also be a helpful tool for selecting tops when beginning to
build a stratigraphic framework using the correlation tool.
Furthermore, existing interpretations can be quantitatively
assessed using match-probability scores generated by the
deep CNN.
By incorporating preprocessing techniques and a user-

August 2019 PETROPHYSICS 476

 Brazell et al.
de¿ned three-dimensional search window the correlation
tool is able to con¿dently suggest formation tops correlations
even in areas of cyclicity and repeating log motifs. User-
de¿ned seed well, formation tops data and search window
inputs allow the tool to access a geologist’s insights and a
priori knowledge to rapidly generate robust predictions and
is recognized as a key feature of the correlation tool.
The extensive and variable training of the deep CNN
allows it to adapt to changes in log character. Figure 7 shows
a rapidly thinning Chester Formation in which the formation
is systematically truncated towards the NE. With the addition
of intermediate seed wells, the correlation tool is able to
adapt to the changes in the top of Chester log motif and
identify the unconformity with a high degree of accuracy.
The Hunton Formation is also removed by an unconformity
to the NE, however the correlation tool is unable to identify
the boundary without additional seed-well inputs.
As the tool is able to correlate many wells in a short
amount of time, an iterative approach is employed. Figure
8 shows the progression of the top of Meramec structure
map as the correlation is extended and more data points are
generated. The initial structure map (Fig. 8a) contains 20
manually correlated control points and shows an anomalous
deepening of the surface in the SW. As more wells are
correlated during iterations 1 and 2 (Figs. 8b and 8c), this
anomaly is removed. Additional well control shows the top
(a)
Fig. 9—Isochore maps of the Chester Formation, bounded above by the post-Mississippian unconformity and below by the top of Meramec, generated
by the correlation tool (a) and manual-only interpretation (b).
477 PETROPHYSICS
of the Meramec to have a slightly undulating surface that
reÀects, in part, the variability of the post-Mississippian
unconformity which removes a signi¿cant portion of the
Mississippian section near the Nemaha uplift to the East.
The signi¿cant truncation of the Chesterian section,
which overlies the Meramec Formation, by the post-
Mississippian unconformity represents a challenge for the
correlation tool. Figure 9 compares isochore maps derived by
the correlation tool and by manual interpretation. The most
apparent differences between the machine-learning-based
and the interpreter-derived isochore maps (Fig. 9) occur in
the eastern portion of King¿sher County where the Chester
Formation is completely removed. Although the correlation
tool overestimates the thickness of the Chester Formation
near the eastern subcrop boundary, the average difference
between the two isochores is 1.9 ft with a standard deviation
of 17.7 ft, where nearly all of the differences between the
two isochores maps existing along the eastern margin.
CONCLUSIONS
A correlation tool has been developed to assist
geoscience interpreters in the construction of stratigraphic
frameworks in moderate to high well-density areas, thus
allowing the interpreted to use orders of magnitude more
data in a fraction of the time. The tool excels at correlating
(b)
August 2019
 A Machine-Learning-Based Approach to Assistive Well-Log Correlation
distinctive marker tops and allows the interpreter to focus on
areas of complexity and affords them the time to generate
multiple working hypotheses.
The correlation tool uses a universal deep CNN
trained on over ¿ve million data samples from expert
correlations across a variety of depositional environments
and sedimentary basins in order to probabilistically match
log-curve patterns between wells. The universal nature of
the deep CNN model eliminates the need for time- and
resource-intensive training and can be rapidly deployed on a
new dataset. Deep CNN-derived correlation suggestions are
constrained by a small number of examples provided by the
interpreter (i.e., seed wells) and user-de¿ned programmatic
inputs that obey geologic principles and standard correlation
techniques in order to account for basinwide and formation-
speci¿c complexities. We have demonstrated the utility of
the correlation tool in a ~550 well dataset from the STACK
play of the Anadarko Basin. Using initial seed-well data
from only 3% of the dataset, the tool was able to generate
accurate correlations over an additional 90% of the dataset
in 11 minutes. We have shown the correlation tool’s
capacity to generate accurate correlations for markers with
distinctive log motifs even in a geologically complex area in
a fraction of the time needed for a purely manual approach.
By incorporating this tool into a geologic interpretation
workÀow, the geoscience interpreter can use the reduction
in cycle-time afforded by the tool to focus on complex areas
and generate multiple working hypotheses. Additionally,
the correlation tool provides an objective and quantitative
probability of correlation match that can be harnessed to
validate and assess correlation hypotheses.
Future development seeks to incorporate tools
that facilitate more ef¿cient review of CNN-generated
correlations, a dynamic user interface and an adaptive three-
dimensional search windows that will reduce the current
requirements of user-inputs.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank Anadarko Petroleum Corporation for
permission to publish this work and colleagues Christian
Noll, Drew Derenthal, Keith Belk and the reviewers for their
thoughtful suggestions and recommendations to improve
this paper.
NOMENCLATURE
Abbreviations
AOI = area of interest
AUC = area under the receiver operating characteristic
curve
August 2019 PETROPHYSICS
CE = cross entropy
CNN = convolutional neural network
DTW = dynamic time warping
LAS = log ASCII standard
QC = quality control
STACK = Sooner Trend oil ¿eld, Anadarko Basin,
Canadian and King¿sher Counties
Symbols
C1 = class
ti = ground truth
si = classi¿cation score
f() = sigmoid function
REFERENCES:
Baldwin, J.., Otte, D.N., and Whealtley, C.L., 1989, Computer
Emulation of Human Mental Processes: Application of Neural
Network Simulators to Problems in Well Log Interpretation,
Paper SPE-19619 presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8–11
October. DOI: 10.2118/19619-MS.
Fang, J.H., Chen, G.C., Shultz, A.W., and Mahmoud, W., 1992,
Computer-Aided Well Log Correlation (1). AAPG Bulletin,
76(3), 307–317. DOI: 10.1306/BDFF87E0-1718-11D7-
8645000102C1865D.
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., and Hinton, GE., 2017, ImageNet
Classi¿cation with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks,
Communications of the ACM, 60(6), 84–90. DOI:
10.1145/3065386. https://papers.nips.cc/paper/4824-
imagenet-classification-with-deep-convolutional-neural-
networks.pdf. Accessed July 18, 2019.
Lineman, D.J., Mendelson, J.D., and Toksoz, M.N., 1987, Well-to-
Well Log Correlation Using Knowledge-Based Systems and
Dynamic Depth Warping, Paper UU, Transactions, SPWLA
28th Annual Logging Symposium, London, England, UK, 29
June–2 July.
Luthi, S.M., and Bryant, I.D., 1997, Well-log correlation using a
back-propagation neural network. Mathematical Geology,
29(3), 413-414.
Maniar, H., Ryali, S., Kulkarni, M.S., and Abubakar, A., 2018,
Machine Learning Methods in Geoscience, SEG Technical
Program Expanded Abstracts 2018, 4638–4642. DOI:
10.1190/segam2018-2997218.1.
Mann, C.J., and Dowell, T.P., Jr., 1978, Quantitative
Lithostratigraphic Correlation of Subsurface Sequences,
Computers & Geosciences, 4(3), 295–306. DOI:
10.1016/0098-3004(78)90064-X.
Morris, M., Brazell, S., and Lu, P., 2018, Machine-Derived Seismic
Interpretation: Real-World Examples & Lessons Learned,
SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018, 4659-
4663. DOI: 10.1190/segam2018-3001897.1.
Rudman, A.J., and Lankston, R.W., 1973, Stratigraphic Correlation
of Well Logs by Computer Techniques, AAPG Bulletin, 57(3),
577–588.
478
 Brazell et al.

Wu, X., Shi, Y., Fomel, S., Li, F., 2018, Incremental Correlation University of Pennsylvania in 2005. Michael has served as
of Multiple Well Logs Following Geologically Optimal the VP of downtown for Houston chapter of SPWLA. He
Neighbors, Interpretation, 6(3), T713–T722. DOI: 10.1190/ is currently on the board for the SPWLA PDDA SIG as the
INT-2018-0020.1. Vice-Chairman.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Darrin Burton is a geologist and

Analytics Manager at GeoSouthern
Seth Brazell is a geoscientist with Energy Corporation. Prior to
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation’s GeoSouthern he held various roles as a
Advanced Analytics & Emerging geologist and stratigrapher at Anadarko
Technologies team. His current research Petroleum Corporation and New¿eld
focuses on the development and Exploration. He holds Geology degrees
application of AI and analytical solutions from Brigham Young University (BS)
to enable the digital transformation and The University of Texas (MS, PhD).
of geoscience interpretation within
Anadarko. He has helped develop and deploy tools that
accelerate reservoir characterization in offshore deepwater
and onshore unconventional domains. Seth earned BS and
MS degrees in Geology from UNC-Charlotte and a PhD in
Geoscience from UNC-Chapel Hill where he focused on
integrated core, well log and seismic stratigraphy.

Alex Bayeh is a Staff Data Scientist

and manager of the Data Science
Technology Advancement team in
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation’s
Advanced Analytics and Emerging
Technologies group. His current area of
research includes the application of deep
learning for improving and accelerating
subsurface characterization, as well as the development
of arti¿cial-intelligence-enabled tools for geologists and
geophysicists. In addition to his research as an individual
contributor, he and his team have the mission of keeping
the larger data science community within Anadarko at the
leading edge of hardware and software capabilities. Alex
graduated with a PhD in Aerospace Engineering from Texas
A&M University in 2013, and was a data science consultant
for several years before joining Anadarko in 2017.

Michael Ashby is a staff petrophysicist

in the Advanced Analytics and Emerging
Technologies team at Anadarko Petroleum
Corporation. In his current role, he is
focused on active research of leveraging
machine learning in combination with
traditional petrophysical approaches to
solve subsurface characterization issues.
Prior to joining Anadarko, he worked as a petrophysicist
for Apache Corporation and Baker Hughes. He started his
career as a wireline ¿eld engineer for Schlumberger. He
received his BS degree in Earth Sciences from Edinboro

479 PETROPHYSICS August 2019