Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

A novel approach by integrating the core derived FZI and well logging data
into artificial neural network model for improved permeability prediction
in a heterogeneous gas reservoir
Nasser Alizadeh a, *, Negin Rahmati a, Adel Najafi a, Edmund Leung b, Pooria Adabnezhad a
a
Petro Pars Oil and Gas Company, Tehran, Iran
b
RESMAN, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Predicting and extrapolating the permeability between wells to obtain the 3D distribution for the geological
Permeability prediction model, is a crucial and challenging task in reservoir simulation. Permeability is influenced by both digenetic
Heterogeneity characteristics and depositional factors like sorting and grain size. Hence, a reliable model should consider these
Artificial neural networks
characteristics for prediction of permeability. Grouping the rocks into different hydraulic flow units (HFU) or
Polynomial regression models
Discrete rock types
discrete rock types (DRT), improves the identity of the reservoir characteristics and provide a more accurate
Flow zone indicator permeability prediction. Multi variable regression models and Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) were applied in
this study to correlate core permeability and porosity with well logs to predict permeability logs. It was observed
that the accuracy of the models diminished in heterogeneous reservoirs, where there is a wide permeability
distribution.
In this study, we are presenting a novel approach to predict permeability in heterogeneous oil and gas res­
ervoirs. In this method the core permeability and porosity data are categorized using the concept of DRT and the
probability density functions are used to investigate the relationships between the logs and DRT groups. The ANN
model is applied to correlate the core derived flow zone indicator (FZI) with wire-line logging data with a single
key well to predict K-logs. In this approach one single well, which contains all DRT groups is considered as a key
well to develop and train the ANN model. It was observed that ANN model exhibits better prediction perfor­
mance in heterogeneous reservoirs when it is developed and trained on single well data containing all DRT
groups. This approach can capture heterogeneity in the reservoirs where it has been applied successfully to
predict permeability in an actual heterogeneous carbonate gas reservoir.

Credit author statement
Nasser Alizadeh: conceptualization, methodology, supervision,
original draft preparation, validation. Negin Rahmati: data prepara­
tion, visualization, data curation, software, investigation. Adel Najafi:
visualization, software, writing original draft, validation and data
curation. Edmund Leung: review and editing. Pooria Adabnezhad:
software.
1. Introduction
Permeability is a crucial parameter in reservoir characterization and
predicting its 3D distribution in heterogeneous reservoirs is a
challenging task. A poor prediction of permeability will result in inef­
ficient and unreliable dynamic models, thus, reducing the accuracy of
these models for describing and modeling the past, current and future
performance of oil and gas reservoirs. The classical approach in the oil
industry was to predict permeability from a single well log attribute. The
Kozeny Carman or Wyllie and Rose equations (Wyllie and Rose, 1950)
were often used to predict permeability from a porosity log. These
equations have adjustable variables with values depending on the
sorting and geometry of rock grains (Rose and Bruce, 1949). Wendt et al.
(1986) reported that by including other well log attributes than porosity
and using multiple linear regression approach, the correlation coeffi­
cient between the estimated and actual permeability increases. Helle
et al. (2001) have made similar suggestions. They suggested that instead

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Alizadeh.Na@ppars.com (N. Alizadeh).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2022.110573
Received 6 January 2022; Received in revised form 22 April 2022; Accepted 23 April 2022
Available online 27 April 2022
0920-4105/© 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
N. Alizadeh et al.
Table 1
The statistical parameters of the core porosity (fraction) and permeability (mD).
Parameter Core plugs Min
Porosity 10,387 0.00005
Permeability 10,387 0.0003
of using a single well log, a group of several logs provide a better
permeability prediction because of the existing correlations between
permeability and other well log parameters. Lacentre and Carrica
(2003); Yao and Holditch (1993) introduced a method to estimate
permeability based on well logs and core data. Many other researchers
also attempted to establish mathematical relations between perme­
ability and other petrophysical parameters and well logs by using sta­
tistical methods such as multivariate regression analysis and proxy
modeling (Balan et al., 1995; Xue et al., 1997). These researches were
helpful in identifying influential parameters on permeability, but were
not successful to provide a general workflow for accurate prediction of
permeability in all reservoirs and their applicability should also be
checked in other field studies. Although these techniques have provided
good results in some cases, they require the existence of many core
measurements, which is expensive to achieve in practice. In addition,
the accuracy of these correlations diminishes when dealing with het­
erogeneous reservoirs.
Recently, intelligent approaches including artificial neural networks
(ANNs), fuzzy clustering and least square support vector machines
(LSSVM) have been proven as effective tools for prediction of reser­
voirpermeability. Finol et al. (2001) developed a rule based fuzzy model
for the prediction of petrophysical rock parameters. Lim and Kim (2004)
used neural network and fuzzy logic modeling for estimation of porosity
and permeability in a reservoir, revealing that these methods have po­
tential for future use and implementation. Zhu et al. (2017) have suc­
cessfully applied machine learning methods for permeability prediction
and achieved acceptable results. Khalifah et al. (2019) compared ANN
with seven conventional empirical equations for prediction of perme­
ability in a tight carbonate reservoir. They also used the genetic algo­
rithm to develop a new empirical equation for prediction of permeability
based on their dataset. Their results showed that the machine learning
methods provide better predictions in comparison with empirical
equations. Matinkia et al. (2022a, 2022b) predicted permeability from
well logs using a new hybrid machine learning algorithm. Their research
combined Social Ski-Driver (SSD) algorithm with the multilayer
perception (MLP) neural network and presented a new hybrid algorithm
to predict the rock permeability. Their results indicated that the hybrid
models can deliver satisfactory results.
Models developed based on hydraulic flow units (HFU) provide a
better permeability prediction compared to other ones. Flow Zone In­
dicator (FZI) which is calculated according to the rock porosity and
permeability is strongly related to HFU. Rock samples, which belong to
the same HFU, have similar FZI ranges. While HFU is a parameter used
for classification, FZI is a quantitative parameter, which makes it suit­
able for developing prediction models. In the past, different researchers
(Baker et al., 2013; Amraei and Falahat, 2021; Abbaszadeh et al., 1996)
developed models to predict FZI, and then applied the predicted FZI to
calculate permeability. Soto et al. (2001) implemented a fuzzy model for
estimation of permeability by grouping the data into different HFUs
using the FZI values, and managed to predict permeability accurately. A
neural network model was proposed by Aminian et al. (2003) to identify
various flow units and estimate the permeability of a reservoir. Kharrat
et al. (2009) developed an ANN model for prediction of permeability in
different rock types of a heterogeneous carbonate reservoir. Ali et al.
(2013) utilized the support vector machine (SVM) and proposed an
approach to predict the FZI values in a carbonate reservoir by using well
log data as input parameters. Although there are different research
works in the literature on application of regression and machine
learning approaches for prediction of permeability, but few papers are
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573
Max Average Variance Std. Deviation
0.423 0.094 0.007 0.085
1849.64 23.72 10,455.66 102.25
available on prediction of permeability in tight carbonate gas conden­
sate reservoirs, which are among the most challenging reservoirs to
develop in the world (Vafaie et al., 2021; Rashid et al., 2015). Since
developing new methodologies to accurately predict permeability is
important, further analysis and examination of machine learning and
regression methods to find reliable, fast and accurate models are of great
importance.
In this study, we are presenting a novel approach based on the
artificial neural networks (ANN) to predict the 3D distribution of
permeability in heterogeneous tight gas condensate reservoirs using the
petrophysical log data and FZI from core data. In this approach, the core
permeability and porosity data are categorized using the concept of
DRT. The ANN method is then applied to correlate the core derived FZI
with wire-line logging data to predict permeability. It was observed that
the current ANN models provide good results in homogeneous sandstone
reservoirs but they don’t deliver satisfactory results in heterogeneous
carbonate reservoirs. Contrary to the existing ANN models, the novel
approach presented in this paper applies to a single well, which contains
all DRT groups to develop and train the ANN model. In this study, it is
demonstrated that the model delivers satisfactory results in heteroge­
neous reservoirs when it is trained on the data of a single well containing
all DRT groups. This approach enables the ANN model to capture het­
erogeneity in oil and gas reservoirs.
2. Rock typing: FZI method
Rock typing is a process in which reservoir rocks are classified into
distinct units. One of the frequently used approaches for rock typing is
the FZI method. Amaefule et al. (1993) introduced this method for the
first time. This technique identifies existing trends between permeability
and porosity using the FZI values of reservoir rocks. The general
Kozeny-Carman relation for calculating permeability is given by Eq. (1).
[ ]
∅3e 1
K = 1014 (1)
(1 − ∅e )2 Fs τ2 Sgv
2
where, K is core permeability in mD, Øe is effective core porosity, Fs
denotes shape factor, τ is tortuosity and Sgv represents the surface area
per grain volume. Calculation of permeability by this equation is not an
easy task because it is difficult to measure the Fs, τ and Sgv parameters
for reservoir rocks. Amaefule et al. (1993) defined the FZI as the square
root of the 1/Fsτ2S2gv term and derived Eq. (2) to obtain FZI from core
data:
RQI
FZI = (2)
∅n
√̅̅̅̅̅̅
K
RQI = 0.0314 (3)
Øe
Øe
Øn = (4)
1 − Øe
where, RQI is a parameter called reservoir quality index (μm) and Øn is
the normalized porosity. The calculated FZI is then used to group the
rocks into discrete rock types (DRTs) according to the following relation:
DRT = Round(2 Log(FZI) + 10.6) (5)
The X field is a natural gas field, which covers an area of 3700 square
kilometers. This tight gas field is 3000 m below the seabed at a water
2
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Fig. 1. Histogram for core porosity across the field.

Fig. 4. Representative relations between core permeability and porosity for
each DRT group.

depth of 65 m and it is mainly composed of limestone and dolomite. The

field consists of four main gas bearing reservoirs, namely L1, L2, L3 and
L4 with similar rock properties. These four reservoirs are isolated by
impermeable barriers but based on the observed pressure analysis, they
are communicating through faults. Gas production from the X field
commenced in 2002.
The core data of eighteen wells were used in this study for rock
typing based on the FZI approach. The statistical parameters of the core
porosity and permeability are summarized in Table 1.
From the histogram for porosity shown in Fig. 1, a unimodal porosity
distribution is observed with a minimum and maximum porosity values
of 0.00005 and 0.423 (m3/m3) respectively. Fig. 2 shows a histogram of
the permeability across the field with the data range of 0.0003–1849.64
(mD). The wide range of permeability distribution on this histogram
Fig. 2. Histogram for core permeability across the field.
indicates that the understudy gas field is very heterogeneous and for an
accurate permeability prediction, clustering the core data into appro­
priate DRT groups is essential.
By applying the FZI rock typing approach ten different rock types
were identified in the X gas field. The plot of reservoir quality index
(RQI) against normalized porosity (Øn) on a log-log scale results in a unit
slope straight line for each rock type. The intercept of the straight line at
Øn = 1 gives the average FZI value for the specific rock type. Based on
the reservoir quality index vs. normalized porosity plot shown in Fig. 3,
ten different DRT groups (rock types) can be identified in this gas field
study.
For each rock type, a representative curve describing the correlation
between core permeability and porosity was derived by replacing the 1/
Fsτ2S2gv term with FZI2avg in Eq. (1) as follows:

∅3e
K = 1014 FZI 2avg (6)
(1 − ∅e )2
Fig. 3. A log-log plot of reservoir quality index vs. normalized porosity, which
classifies 10 discrete rock types in the X gas field. where, FZIavg is the average FZI for each DRT group given in Table 2. The
plot of representative correlations (log K vs. porosity) for each DRT
group is shown in Fig. 4.
Table 2 The FZI range, average FZI, average porosity and average perme­
Average values of FZI, porosity (fraction) and permeability (md) for each rock
ability of each rock type (DRT group) are summarized in Table 2. This
type.
table shows that, there are notable differences in average permeability
DRT group FZI range avg. FZI avg. Porosity avg. Permeability and porosity of various rock types, which indicate the differences in
1 0.01–0.05 0.04 0.25 0.05 their fluid capacity. In other words, good rock types with higher FZI
2 0.05–0.158 0.11 0.19 0.28 values have better reservoir quality and percolation capacity compared
3 0.158–0.50 0.32 0.14 1.04
to those with lower FZI values (poor rock types).
4 0.50–1.58 0.95 0.11 5.40
5 1.58–5.01 2.87 0.08 30.98
6 5.01–15.82 8.79 0.04 70.60 3. The regression approach: polynomial regression model
7 15.82–50 27.09 0.02 45.16
8 50–153 83.23 0.01 44.00 In this study we are aiming to correlate FZI from core data with wire-
9 153–4465 686.61 0.003 17.38
line logging data by means of multiple linear regression models to pre­
10 4465–118,753 46,237.80 0.0002 10.91
dict the permeability-logs in the logged intervals of the wells.

3
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Fig. 5. The density functions of different logs for all rock types. (a) Dolomite volume log, (b) Neutron porosity log, (c) Shale volume log, (d) Effective porosity log, (e)
Bulk density log, (f) Effective water saturation log, (g) Calcite volume log and (h) Anhydrate volume log.

4
N. Alizadeh et al.
Regression analysis is utilized for estimating the relationship be­
tween a response (dependent variable) and regressors (independent
variables). It can be used for modeling the future relationship between
variables.
The relationship between a dependent variable and an independent
variable can be assessed by a simple linear regression model. It can be
expressed by the following equation (Eq. (7)):
y = a + bx + ε (7)
where, y is dependent variable (response), a is intercept, b is the slope, x
is independent variable (regressor) and ε is error.
Multiple linear regression model is similar to the simple linear
model, with the exception that it has multiple independent variables.
The response variable can also be approximated by a polynomial
regression model such as in Eq. (8). It is just another variant of the
general linear regression method.
y = b0 + b1 x1 + b2 x2 + b3 x1 x2 + b4 x21 + b5 x22 + error (8)
where, y is dependent variable (response), b0 is intercept, b’s are
regression coefficients and x’s are independent variables (regressors).
3.1. Lithology and sensitivity analysis
The giant X gas field is composed of Anhydrate, Calcite, Dolomite
and clay minerals with a significant vertical heterogeneity in terms of
lithology, porosity and permeability. This field is under development
with limited log data available. At first, we selected eight conventional
open hole well logs from eighteen wells to develop the polynomial
regression model. These include effective porosity log (PHIE), effective
water saturation log (SWE), bulk density log (RHOB), neutron porosity
log (NPHI), calcite volume log (VCALC), dolomite volume log (VDOL),
shale volume log (WCS) and anhydrate volume log (VANH). It should be
highlighted that the effective porosity log is obtained by combining the
neutron porosity, bulk density and sonic logs. Effective water saturation
log is obtained from resistivity log, while the calcite volume, dolomite
volume, shale volume and anhydrate volume logs are obtained from
bulk density and photo electric factor logs. The bulk density and neutron
porosity are raw logs.
The initial polynomial regression model is given by Eq. (9).
∑8 ∑7 ∑8 ∑8
FZIcore = λ0 + i=1
λi Xi + i=1 j=i+1
λij Xi Xj + i=1
λi Xi2 (9)
where, FZIcore is the core derived FZI, λ0 is intercept, λ′ s are regression
coefficients, X1 is PHIE, X2 is SWE, X3 is RHOB, X4 is NPHI, X5 is VCALC,
X6 is VDOL, X7 is WCS and X8 is VANH.
In this study the probability density function (PDF) was used in order
to investigate the relationships between the selected log responses and
DRT groups. The probability density functions of the log responses for
each DRT group are plotted and compared. If they are overlapping and
forming just one cluster with almost the same mean value for all rock
types, it can be concluded that the log is not a good regressor and can
therefore be discarded. On the other hand, if distinct clusters can be
distinguished, it indicates that the log is a good regression variable and
can be used in multiple regression model.
Dolomite is formed when magnesium ions replace calcium ions in
calcite. This geological process is called dolomitization. During this
process the volume reduction occurs, which results in larger pore spaces.
Therefore, dolomitization modifies the rock quality of a formation. The
dolomite volume log (VDOL) represents the volume of the dolomite of a
formation. The relationship of the dolomite volume log with FZI can be
very contradicting. The FZI is low when the large pore spaces created
during dolomitization are filled with cement or closed by tectonic forces,
and it is high when the pore spaces are unfilled and open, but for both
cases the dolomite volume log gives high responses. Based on seismic
stratigraphy studies, there is no contradictory relationship between FZI
5
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573
and responses of dolomite volume log in the X field and this log can be a
good indicator of rock typing. The density functions of dolomite volume
log are shown in Fig. 5 (a). The density functions of all rock types show 4
clusters. The first cluster, which has the lowest volume of dolomite in­
cludes DRT1 and DRT2, which are poor quality rock types. DRT3 and
DRT10 are falling into the second cluster, while DRT4 and DRT9 are
forming cluster three. The fourth cluster, which has the highest dolomite
volume, includes good quality rock types, namely DRT5 through 8. The
wide variance intervals of all clusters are an indication of heterogeneous
formations. The dolomite volume log was considered as a variable (re­
gressor) in the polynomial regression model.
Neutron tool is a nuclear device which is very sensitive to the amount
of hydrogen atoms in a formation and less sensitive to other elements.
Neutron porosity log (NPHI) measures the hydrogen concentration in
the formation and its output should be calibrated to read the true
porosity assuming that the pores are saturated with fresh water and for a
given matrix like limestone, sandstone or dolomite. The responses of the
neutron porosity log depend on the porosity, the type of the fluid in the
pores and the composition of the minerals. Determining the porosity of
the formation is the main usage of the neutron porosity log. There is no
relationship between responses of neutron porosity log and FZI because
neutron porosity log can give two different responses to the formation
intervals with the same FZI values. An example of this contradictory
relationship between neutron porosity log and FZI is the low response of
the neutron porosity log in the gas cap of a permeable and porous for­
mation where FZI is high, while in the oil-bearing interval with the same
FZI the response of neutron porosity log is high. The density functions of
neutron porosity logs for all rock types are shown in Fig. 5 (b). As can be
seen an overlapping is almost obtained and all density functions have
the same mean value. The density functions of neutron porosity log are
forming just one cluster and they are very similar and with no distinct
differences for all rock types. Hence, we can conclude that this log is not
a good regressor and can therefore be discarded.
The same results were obtained for the shale volume log (WCS)
which can be seen in Fig. 5 (c). For the same reasons mentioned for the
neutron porosity log, the shale volume log was also discarded and was
not considered as regressor in the polynomial regression model. Shale
volume log represents the volume of the shale. Shale is a fine-grained
sedimentary rock that forms from the compaction of silt and clay-size
mineral particles. Shale reduces the porosity and permeability of a
rock. Therefore, the high shale volume indicates the poor rock quality
and low FZI. It should be highlighted that the field being studied has a
very low volume of shale.
Effective porosity log (PHIE) measures the total porosity by
excluding shale water. This log can be a good indicator of rock typing.
The density functions of the effective porosity log are shown in Fig. 5 (d).
The density functions of all DRT groups show three distinct clusters. The
first cluster includes DRT6 through 10 with the same mean values. DRT4
and DRT5 fall into cluster two and finally the third cluster includes
DRT1, DRT2 and DRT3. The first cluster has the lowest mean value for
porosity. This cluster represents the good rock types, which are partially
fractured. The third cluster has the highest mean value and it has a wide
range of porosity (variance interval) which is an indication of hetero­
geneous formation. This log was considered as a dependent variable in
the regression model.
The bulk density log (RHOB) measures the bulk density of a forma­
tion. The formations are bombarded with gamma rays, which are
emitted from a radioactive source. The radiation response is used for
determining the bulk density. The main use of the bulk density log is to
determine the total porosity of a formation, and it is also used to detect
the gas bearing formations. There is a contradicting relationship be­
tween the response of density log and FZI. For example, the response of
the density log is low for a permeable and porous sandstone where FZI is
high, while this log would also give low response for the gas bearing
intervals with very low FZI. The density functions of the density log for
all DRT groups are shown in Fig. 5 (e). Different clusters can be
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Table 3 distinguished by the histograms of the density log responses. The density
The coefficients of the polynomial regression model for FZI prediction. functions can be grouped into 3 clusters. In the first cluster DRT6
Term Coefficients Value through 10 can be grouped as high-density rock types. DRT4 and DRT5
are falling into the second cluster, while DRT1 through 3 are forming the
Intercept λ0 − 3889.9
PHIE (X1) λ1 4579.6 third cluster with a low bulk density and wide variance intervals, which
SWE (X2) λ2 − 382.93 is an indication of a heterogeneous formation. This log was considered
RHOB (X3) λ3 2910.3
VCALC (X4) λ4 320.4
VDOL (X5) λ5 − 790.2
PHIE × SWE λ6 197.51
PHIE × RHOB λ7 − 2136.5
PHIE × VCALC λ8 433.12
PHIE × VDOL λ9 1455.9
SWE × RHOB λ10 − 2.4663
SWE × VCALC λ11 286.65
SWE × VDOL λ12 403.05
RHOB × VCALC λ13 − 326.85
RHOB × VDOL λ14 − 63.867
VCALC × VDOL λ15 754.85
PHIE2 λ16 − 47.427
SWE2 λ17 137.65
RHOB2 λ18 − 489.51
VCALC2 λ19 239.55
VDOL2 λ20 604.28

Fig. 7. A cross plot of the predicted K by regression model against core K on a

log-log scale.

Fig. 6. A comparison between the predicted K by regression model and core K for test wells. (a) test well#5, (b) test well#7, (c) test well#8, (d) test well#9.

6
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Table 4
The regression coefficients of the DRT-based regression models for DRT groups 1–5.
Term Coefficients DRT1 DRT2 DRT3 DRT4 DRT5

Intercept λ0 − 10793 − 2.9371 0.65401 3.2659 − 13.111

PHIE (X1) λ1 21,704 1.9082 − 2.0131 1.896 − 12.025
SWE (X2) λ2 − 14.992 0.21536 0.69633 0.49196 − 1.7747
RHOB (X3) λ3 − 8.0824 2.1639 − 0.74535 − 2.9663 12.308
VCALC (X4) λ4 21,604 1.0418 0.3971 2.3312 2.124
VDOL (X5) λ5 21,606 − 0.43961 2.2333 4.2531 3.9929
PHIE × SWE λ6 14.971 − 0.4271 − 0.74052 − 0.09514 − 0.22708
PHIE × RHOB λ7 7.4044 − 1.0724 0.91074 1.1357 − 2.2261
PHIE × VCALC λ8 − 21719 0.56706 0.5719 − 4.7873 10.082
PHIE × VDOL λ9 − 21720 1.8006 − 0.62486 − 5.2118 10.935
SWE × RHOB λ10 − 0.16629 − 0.08404 − 0.22658 − 0.21744 0.094058
SWE × VCALC λ11 15.539 0.094237 − 0.03095 − 0.13506 1.3404
SWE × VDOL λ12 15.488 0.11486 0.002774 − 0.08858 0.60197
RHOB × VCALC λ13 9.1607 − 0.47104 0.033854 − 0.70382 − 1.6617
RHOB × VDOL λ14 9.2022 − 0.04535 − 0.45619 − 1.6732 − 2.0596
VCALC × VDOL λ15 − 21626 0.35301 − 1.0043 0.46414 1.0322
PHIE2 λ16 − 10910 0.2502 1.0424 − 3.614 29.796
SWE2 λ17 − 0.06215 − 0.05081 0.003987 0.12236 0.3449
RHOB2 λ18 − 0.17021 − 0.35308 0.18873 0.75673 − 2.1443
VCALC2 λ19 − 10812 − 0.02652 − 0.21349 − 0.21244 1.0313
VDOL2 λ20 − 10814 0.26382 − 0.72149 0.61847 0.83259

Table 5
The regression coefficients of the DRT-based regression models for DRT 6–10.
Term Coefficients DRT6 DRT7 DRT8 DRT9 DRT10

Intercept λ0 − 23.477 − 22.82 4233.4 − 95865 − 91,480,000

PHIE (X1) λ1 108.66 304.05 − 7587.8 117,000 137,280,000
SWE (X2) λ2 1.6332 27.946 287.8 − 13825 − 39,478,000
RHOB (X3) λ3 22.942 39.891 − 2929.8 70,379 95,740,000
VCALC (X4) λ4 5.9112 − 5.0134 − 1007.3 10,978 − 31,034,000
VDOL (X5) λ5 − 8.045 2.8917 − 530.39 − 1020.3 − 53,460,000
PHIE × SWE λ6 23.688 − 56.069 − 160.22 4831.8 − 68,357,000
PHIE × RHOB λ7 − 48.792 − 158.91 2317.2 − 36743 128,500,000
PHIE × VCALC λ8 5.9138 137.44 1446.9 − 26861 − 156,640,000
PHIE × VDOL λ9 4.6476 180.38 1228 − 16317 178,420,000
SWE × RHOB λ10 − 1.0007 − 7.6807 − 74.794 3733.8 181,710,000
SWE × VCALC λ11 − 0.02198 − 6.5685 − 71.803 3258.4 196,280,000
SWE × VDOL λ12 − 1.5071 2.7925 10.303 3061.1 8,354,600
RHOB × VCALC λ13 − 1.615 4.5268 386.71 − 4460.2 12,409,000
RHOB × VDOL λ14 2.0261 0.64715 170.04 − 915.02 10,750,000
VCALC × VDOL λ15 2.0147 − 27.7 99.729 772.09 11,010,000
PHIE2 λ16 − 17.036 − 374.21 4873.1 − 31790 5,741,100
SWE2 λ17 1.3605 − 3.5179 − 35.428 281.65 15,467,000
RHOB2 λ18 − 3.9729 − 7.5642 508.29 − 12562 21,908,000
VCALC2 λ19 − 2.2628 − 7.0159 30.703 − 893.33 1,167,000
VDOL2 λ20 3.4545 − 10.276 76.329 1179.7 − 601470

Fig. 8. A comparison between the predicted K by regression model and core K Fig. 9. A comparison between the predicted K by regression model and core K
for DRT1. for DRT2.

7
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

effective water saturation log measures the effective pore spaces which
are occupied with water. This log can be used to determine the irre­
ducible water saturation, which can be a good indicator of rock typing.
The calcite volume log represents the volume of the calcite with the
chemical formula CaCO3. This mineral is the major component of car­
bonate reservoirs.
The density functions of anhydrate volume log (VANH) are shown in

Fig. 10. A cross plot of the predicted K by the DRT-based regression models
against core K.

as a variable in the regression model.

The density functions of effective water saturation (SWE) and calcite
volume (VCALC) logs (Fig. 5 (f) and (g)) are very similar to those of
dolomite volume log. The probability density functions of these logs are
not overlapping and distinct clusters can be distinguished. Therefore,
effective water saturation and calcite volume logs were also considered
as regressors and used to develop the polynomial regression model. The Fig. 12. A cross plot of the predicted K by ANN against core K across the field.

Fig. 11. A comparison between the predicted K by ANN model and core K for test wells. (a) test well#5, (b) test well#7, (c) test well#8 and (d) test well#9.

8
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Fig. 13. A comparison between the predicted K by ANN model and core K
for DRT1.

Fig. 14. A comparison between the predicted K by ANN model and core K
for DRT2.

Fig. 16. The flowchart of the novel ANN approach.

3.2. The final regression model

Based on the results of probability density function analysis that we

conducted for each log type in Section 3.1, five logs were selected to
develop the polynomial regression model, namely effective porosity
(PHIE), effective water saturation (SWE), bulk density (RHOB), calcite
volume (VCALC) and dolomite volume (VDOL) logs. Three logs were
excluded from the initial model (Eq. (9)), namely neutron porosity
(NPHI), shale volume (WCS) and anhydrate volume (VANH) logs. The
final polynomial regression model is given by Eq. (10).
Fig. 15. A cross plot of the predicted K by the DRT-based ANN models against ∑5 ∑
4 ∑
5 ∑5
core K. FZIcore = λ0 + i=1
λi Xi + λij Xi Xj + i=1
λi Xi2 (10)
i=1 j=i+1

Fig. 5 (h). As can be seen in this Figure the histograms of anhydrate

where, FZIcore is the core derived FZI, λ0 is intercept, λ′ s are regression
volume log responses are almost overlapping and no distinct clusters can
coefficients, X1 is PHIE, X2 is SWE, X3 is RHOB, X4 is VCALC and X5 is
be distinguished, consequently this log was excluded from the regression
VDOL. It should be highlighted that the mathematical regression models
model. Anhydrite is an evaporite mineral with the chemical formula
were created and solved using MATLAB 8.4 (R2014b) programming
CaSO4. It forms where large volumes of sea water have been evaporated
language.
and salt deposition has occurred. This mineral has a very low neutron
The polynomial regression model given by Eq. (10) is correlating the
porosity and gamma ray responses. There is a strong relationship be­
core derived FZI with the log responses to predict the FZI values for the
tween anhydrate volume log and FZI. The presence of anhydrite de­
uncored but logged intervals of the wells. The predicted FZI-logs are
creases the rock quality and FZI.
then converted to K-logs using Eq. (2).
For regression analysis the core and log data of eighteen wells were

9
N. Alizadeh et al.
Fig. 17. The predicted K-log by the trained ANN and core K-log for the single
key well.
used, out of which fourteen were considered as key wells (wells# 1–4, 6,
10–18) and four, for testing or used as blind wells (wells# 5, 7, 8 and 9).
The key wells were used for modeling purposes and the test wells for
checking the accuracy of the developed regression models. It should be
highlighted that all eighteen wells were logged and cored as well. At
first, the outcome variable, namely the core derived FZI (FZIcore) was
regressed on PHIE, SWE, RHOB, VCALC and VDOL logs to find the
weight factors or regression coefficients. The results are summarized in
Table 3.
Having determined the regression coefficients, the regression model
was quality controlled by predicting the FZI-logs in the cored intervals of
the test wells. The predicted FZI-logs were then converted to K-logs,
which are plotted and compared to core permeability in Fig. 6 (a) to (d).
It can be observed that no good match is achieved and the regression
model is unable to match most points of very low and high
permeabilities.
A cross plot of the predicted permeability by regression model
against core permeability on a log-log scale is shown in Fig. 7, which
gives a correlation coefficient of 0.054.
Different polynomial regression models of different orders with
different combinations of logs were selected and new regressions were
conducted but no improvement was observed. Furthermore, four
different regression models for L1-L4 reservoirs were developed but no
significant changes were observed and all developed regression models
were unable to capture heterogeneity in the X field.
In order to investigate the effects of heterogeneity on the results of
the polynomial regression model, the core derived FZI and the related
log data for each DRT group were regressed and ten new DRT-based
regression models (one for each DRT group) were developed. The
10
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573
calculated regression coefficients are summarized in Tables 4 and 5.
The predicted permeability for DRT1 and DRT2 are plotted and
compared to core permeability in Figs. 8 and 9. The results for DRT
groups 3 to 10 are illustrated in Figs. S1 to S8, Supplementary Material.
It can be observed that good matches have been achieved for all DRT
groups.
Fig. 10 shows a cross plot of the predicted permeability by the DRT-
based regression models against core permeability on a log-log scale for
all DRT groups, which gives a correlation coefficient of 0.7218.
Based on the achieved results, it can be concluded that the DRT-
based regression models can accurately predict Permeability. Howev­
er, the developed regression model for the entire field (all DRT groups)
did not achieve a good match and is unable to capture heterogeneity in
the X gas condensate field.
4. Artificial neural networks approach
The second approach in this study used artificial neural networks
(ANN) to predict K-logs. They were used to better correlate the core
derived FZI and well logging data. ANN are one of the main tools used in
machine learning. Artificial intelligence methods have been applied
widely in the petroleum industry. Artificial intelligence methods to es­
timate different reservoir properties as referenced by Anemangely et al.
(2019), Rashidi et al. (2021) and Matinkia et al. (2022a, 2022b). Their
results show that these techniques are particularly useful and provide
acceptable reservoir property predictions.
In this study, one-hidden layer feed forward ANN model was trained
with 17 hidden neurons. The number of hidden layers and neurons were
determined based on a trial and error approach.
The mathematical models were created using MATLAB 8.4 (R2014b)
programming language. The error back propagation algorithm was
employed for adjusting the weights and biases of the network to mini­
mize the error for the validation data set. The mean square error was
considered for evaluating the performance of the network. The
Levenberg-Marquardt numerical optimization technique was used for
training the network, which operated in batch mode. Batch training of
the network proceeds by making weight and bias changes based on an
entire set (batch) of input vectors.
In order to keep the model from being over-trained, the error stop­
ping method was employed. The maximum number of epochs for
training the network was determined to be 1000. The linear and Tan-
Sigmoid transfer functions were considered for the output and hidden
layers of the network, respectively.
Based on the statistical analysis conducted in section 3.1, five logs
were considered as input for the ANN model. They include effective
porosity, effective water saturation, bulk density, calcite volume and
dolomite volume logs and the core derived FZI was considered as the
response of the model. The core and log data of fourteen key wells,
namely wells# 1–4, 6, 10–18 were used for modeling purposes and four
wells, namely wells# 5, 7, 8 and 9 were considered as test wells.
Having trained the ANN model, it was used to predict the FZI-logs in
the cored intervals of the test wells to quality control the trained model.
The predicted FZI-logs were then converted to K-logs, which are shown
in Fig. 11 (a) to (d). It can be observed that better results have been
achieved by ANN model, but like regression model, it is also unable to
capture heterogeneity in the field.
Fig. 12 shows a cross plot of the predicted K by ANN model against
core K on a log-log scale across the field, which gives a correlation factor
of 0.07.
In order to investigate the effects of heterogeneity on the ANN per­
formance, ten DRT-based ANN models were developed (an ANN model
for each DRT group). The predicted permeability for DRT1 and DRT2 are
shown and compared to core permeability in Figs. 13 and 14. The results
for DRT groups 3 to 10 are shown in Figs. S9 to S16, Supplementary
Material. It can be observed that good matches have been achieved for
all DRT groups.
N. Alizadeh et al.
Fig. 18. A comparison between the predicted K by the new approach and core K for blind test wells. (a) blind test well#2, (b) blind test well#3, (c) blind test
well#14 and (d) blind test well#18.
Fig. 15 shows a cross plot of the predicted permeability by DRT-
based ANN models against core permeability on a log-log scale for all
DRT groups across the field, which gives a correlation coefficient of
0.826.
The achieved results by the developed ANN models in this study
indicated that the DRT-based ANN models predicted Permeability
accurately. However, applying the ANN model for the entire field (all
DRT groups) did not deliver satisfactory results, since it was unable to
capture heterogeneity.
5. Artificial neural networks, a novel approach
ANN models have been used by different researchers to date to
predict permeability. The existing ANN models provide good results in
homogeneous sandstone reservoirs but their accuracy diminishes in
heterogeneous reservoirs, such as carbonates.
In the fields, where permeability has a wide range of distribution and
multiple DRT groups (rock types) are available, ANN models are unable
to capture heterogeneity. That’s why clustering the core data into
appropriate DRT groups can yield better results.
In this study, we are presenting a novel approach to predict perme­
ability in heterogeneous reservoirs. In this method the core permeability
11
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573
and porosity data are categorized using the concept of discrete rock
types (DRT). The ANN method is then applied to correlate the core
derived flow zone indicator (FZI) with wire-line logging data to predict
permeability.
Contrary to the current ANN models, the novel approach presented
in this paper applies to a single well, which contains all DRT groups
(rock types) to develop and train the ANN model. It was observed that
ANN model exhibits better prediction performance in heterogeneous
reservoirs when it is trained on the data of a single key well containing
all DRT groups. This data reduction strategy, which is the novelty of this
approach enables the ANN model to capture heterogeneity in oil and gas
reservoirs.
The flowchart of the novel approach, which is presented in this paper
is shown in Fig. 16.
Well#7 was selected as the key well to develop and train the ANN
model, since it contained all DRT groups. The predicted FZI-log by the
trained ANN model was converted to K-log, which is shown and
compared to core K-log in the following Fig. 17.
In order to check the prediction performance and accuracy of the
developed ANN model, it was used to predict K-logs in the cored in­
tervals of the blind-test wells, and was observed that good matches were
achieved for all these wells. The results for the wells# 2, 3, 14 and 18 are
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Fig. 19. The predicted K-log by the new approach for prediction well#13.

12
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Fig. 20. The predicted K-log by the new approach for prediction well#14.

13
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Fig. 21. The predicted K-log by the new approach for prediction well#15.

14
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

Fig. 22. The predicted K-log by the new approach for prediction well#16.

15
N. Alizadeh et al.
Fig. 23. 3D distribution of permeability on top of X gas field.
Fig. 24. An E-W cross section of permeability.
shown in Fig. 18 (a) to (d).
6. Results and discussion
Based on the achieved results by the proposed approach, it can be
concluded that the ANN model exhibits better prediction performance
when it is developed and trained on the core and log data from a single
well containing all DRT groups rather than with all data points. The core
permeability data, which are used in the present work, are highly het­
erogeneous, noisy and exhibit considerable variation range versus
depth. In some cases, the core permeability data in two adjacent depths
of a well differ by a fourth order of magnitude. When the data points of a
well with all DRT groups are considered to train the ANN model, it was
found to better capture heterogeneity. This data reduction strategy en­
ables the ANN model to select instances of input and output data for all
DRT groups from a single key well, which are representatives of similar
16
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573
training instances in the total data points. In other words, when all data
points are used, the ANN model provides better predictions for larger
permeability values, but it fails to provide acceptable prediction results
for intermediate and low permeability values. This means that the ANN
can’t select appropriate training instances of the input and output data
for intermediate and low permeability values when it is trained on all
data points, instead, it prefers to learn existing patterns within the
training instances of high permeability data and tends to be trained on
these values. However, reducing the training points and training the
ANN model on a single well which contains all DRT groups, enables the
model to better identify and learn the existing patterns between input
and output data for the whole range of permeability variation. This al­
lows the ANN model to utilize a smaller dataset that represents the entire
training data of all wells, which increases the accuracy of the predictions
of the ANN model trained on the data of a single key well compared to
the model, which is trained on the entire data set.
Finally, the developed ANN model by the new approach was used to
predict the K-logs in the uncored but logged intervals of the wells. The
predicted K-logs for the prediction wells#13, 14, 15 and 16 are shown in
Figs. 19–22.
Having predicted the K-logs, they were populated in the geological
model. Appropriate variogram models were set and Sequential Gaussian
Simulation method (SGS) was used for this purpose. The generated 3D
permeability model is shown in Fig. 23, and an East-West cross section of
the permeability is shown in Fig. 24.
7. Conclusions
Empirical equations, regression models and machine learning
methods have been used by different researchers to date, to predict
permeability in oil and gas reservoirs. Clustering the core data into
appropriate DRT groups, enables the models to provide more accurate
permeability predictions. However, it was observed that their accuracy
diminished in heterogeneous reservoirs.
In this study the polynomial regression models and artificial neural
networks were used to correlate the core derived FZI with wire-line
logging data to predict K-logs. It was observed that both models were
unable to predict permeability satisfactorily in heterogeneous reser­
voirs, where there was a wide permeability distribution.
A novel approach is presented in this paper to predict permeability in
heterogeneous oil and gas reservoirs. This methodology is applying ANN
models to correlate the core derived FZI with well logs to predict
permeability in the uncored but logged intervals of the wells. This
approach is applicable in reservoirs, which are subdivided into different
hydraulic flow units or discrete rock types. In this approach, contrary to
N. Alizadeh et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 214 (2022) 110573

the existing ANN models, one single well, which contains all DRT groups and Predict Permeability in Uncored Intervals/wells, SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Houston, Texas.
is considered as a key well to develop the ANN model. It is demonstrated
Aminian, K., Ameri, S., Oyerokun, A., Thomas, B., 2003. Prediction of Flow Units and
that ANN model exhibits better prediction performance in heteroge­ Permeability Using Artificial Neural Networks, SPE Western Regional/AAPG Pacific
neous reservoirs when it is developed and trained on the data of a single Section Joint Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Long Beach, California.
well containing all DRT groups. This data reduction strategy, which is Amraei, H., Falahat, R., 2021. Improved ST-FZI method for permeability estimation to
include the impact of porosity type and lithology. J. Petrol. Explor. Prod. 11 (1),
the novelty of this approach enables the ANN model to capture het­ 109–115.
erogeneity in heterogeneous oil and gas reservoirs. This approach was Anemangely, M., Ramezanzadeh, A., Amiri, H., Hoseinpour, S.A., 2019. Machine
successfully applied in an actual carbonate gas reservoir to predict learning technique for the prediction of shear wave velocity using petrophysical logs.
J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 174, 306–327.
permeability logs. The permeability logs were then populated in the Baker, H.A., Al-Jawad, S.N., Murtadha, Z.I., 2013. Permeability prediction in carbonate
geological model by applying geostatistical methods to obtain the 3D reservoir rock using FZI. Iraqi J. Chem. Petrol. Eng. 14 (3), 49–54.
permeability distribution. Balan, B., Mohaghegh, S., Ameri, S., 1995. State-of-the-art in permeability determination
from well log data: Part 1-A comparative study, model development. In: In SPE
Eastern Regional Meeting. OnePetro.
Declaration of competing interest Finol, J., Guo, Y.K., Jing, X.D., 2001. A rule based fuzzy model for the prediction of
petrophysical rock parameters. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 29 (2), 97–113.
Helle, H.B., Bhatt, A., Ursin, B., 2001. Porosity and permeability prediction from wireline
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial logs using artificial neural networks: a North Sea case study. Geophys. Prospect. 49
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence (4), 431–444.
the work reported in this paper. Kharrat, R., Mahdavi, R., Bagherpour, M.H., Hejri, S., 2009. Rock Type and Permeability
Prediction of a Heterogeneous Carbonate Reservoir Using Artificial Neural Networks
Based on Flow Zone Index Approach, SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and
Nomenclature Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Manama, Bahrain.
Lacentre, P.E., Carrica, P.M., 2003. A Method to Estimate Permeability on Uncored Wells
HFU hydraulic flow unit Based on Well Logs and Core Data, SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum
Engineering Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad and
DRT discrete rock type Tobago.
ANN artificial neural networks Lim, J.-S., Kim, J., 2004. Reservoir porosity and permeability estimation from well logs
FZI flow zone indictor using fuzzy logic and neural networks. In: SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference
and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Perth, Australia.
LSSVM least square support vector machine Matinkia, M., Amraeiniya, A., Behboud, M.M., Mehrad, M., Bajolvand, M.,
SVM support vector machine Gandomgoun, M.H., Gandomgoun, M., 2022a. A novel approach to pore pressure
RQI reservoir quality index modeling based on conventional well logs using convolutional neural network.
J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 110156.
PHIE effective porosity log Matinkia, M., Hashami, R., Mehrdad, M., Hajsaeedi, M., Velayati, A., 2022b. Prediction
SWE effective water saturation log of permeability from well logs using a new hybrid machine learning algorithm.
RHOB bulk density log Petroleum. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2022.03.003.
Rashid, F., Glover, P.W.J., Lorinczi, P., Hussein, D., Collier, R., Lawrence, J., 2015.
NPHI neutron porosity log Permeability prediction in tight carbonate rocks using capillary pressure
VCALC calcite volume log measurements. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 68, 536–550.
VDOL dolomite volume log Rashidi, S., Mehrad, M., Ghorbani, H., Wood, D.A., Mohamadian, N., Moghadasi, J.,
Davoodi, S., 2021. Determination of bubble point pressure & oil formation volume
WCS shale volume log
factor of crude oils applying multiple hidden layers extreme learning machine
VANH anhydrate volume log algorithms. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 202, 108425.
PDF probability density function Rose, W., Bruce, W., 1949. Evaluation of capillary character in petroleum reservoir rock.
K permeability, mD J. Petrol. Technol. 1 (5), 127–142.
Soto, B.R., Garcia, J., Torres, F., Perez, G., 2001. Permeability prediction using hydraulic
Ø porosity, fraction flow units and hybrid soft computing systems. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference
Øe effective porosity, fraction and Exhibition. Louisiana, New Orleans. OnePetro.
Øn normalized porosity, dimensionless Vafaie, A., Kivi, I.R., Moallemi, S.A., Habibnia, B., 2021. Permeability prediction in tight
gas reservoirs based on pore structure characteristics: a case study from South
Western Iran. Unconvent. Resour. 1, 9–17.
Appendix A. Supplementary data Wendt, W., Sakurai, S.t., Nelson, P., 1986. Permeability Prediction from Well Logs Using
Multiple Regression, Reservoir Characterization. Elsevier, pp. 181–221.
Wyllie, M., Rose, W.D., 1950. Some theoretical considerations related to the quantitative
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. evaluation of the physical characteristics of reservoir rock from electrical log data.
org/10.1016/j.petrol.2022.110573. J. Petrol. Technol. 2 (4), 105–118.
Xue, G., Datta-Gupta, A., Valko, P., Blasingame, T., 1997. Optimal transformations for
multiple regression: application to permeability estimation from well logs. SPE
References Form. Eval. 12 (2), 85–94.
Yao, C., Holditch, S., 1993. Estimating permeability profiles using core and log data. In:
Abbaszadeh, M., Fujii, H., Fujimoto, F., 1996. Permeability prediction by hydraulic flow SPE Eastern Regional Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Pittsburgh,
units-theory and applications. SPE Form. Eval. 11 (4), 263–271. Pennsylvania.
Al Khalifah, H., Glover, P., Lorinczi, P., 2020. Permeability prediction and diagenesis in Zhu, L.-q., Zhang, C., Wei, Y., Zhang, C.-m., 2017. Permeability prediction of the tight
tight carbonates using machine learning techniques. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 112, 104096. sandstone reservoirs using hybrid intelligent algorithm and nuclear magnetic
Ali, S.S., Nizamuddin, S., Abdulraheem, A., Hassan, M.R., Hossain, M.E., 2013. Hydraulic resonance logging data. Arabian J. Sci. Eng. 42 (4), 1643–1654.
unit prediction using support vector machine. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 110, 243–252.
Amaefule, J.O., Altunbay, M., Tiab, D., Kersey, D.G., Keelan, D.K., 1993. Enhanced
Reservoir Description: Using Core and Log Data to Identify Hydraulic (Flow) Units

17