SOCAR Proceedings No.

1 (2024) 048-056

Reservoir and petroleum engineering

journal home page: http://proceedings.socar.az

A PREDICTIVE MODEL FOR OIL WELL MAINTENANCE:

A CASE STUDY IN KAZAKHSTAN

D. Aktaukenov*1, M. Alshaalan2, Z. Omirbekova1,3, E. Pinsky2

Satbayev University, Almaty, Kazakhstan
1

2
Metropolitan College, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
3
Kazakh National University named after Al-Farabi, Almaty, Kazakhstan

ABSTRACT

This paper proposes a predictive model to help oil workers build a reliable model for identifying oilwell failures. It can help
geologists experienced with Machine Learning to improve the accuracy of failure identification and a more accurate approach to
well-maintenance planning. This study is based on output data statistics such as per-well daily oil flowmeter readings. The volatility
of these indications makes it possible to determine the probability of an oilwell failure. This method makes it possible to rank wells
according to the principle of the most probable failures for workers making decisions. The use of predictive diagnostics can help
to detect equipment problems early, thereby minimizing unplanned downtime. Unplanned sudden oilwell failures increase the
company’s operating costs, as well as increase risks of environmental pollution.

Keywords: machine learning; classification algorithms; oil and gas; prediction algorithms; decision-making.

© 2024 «OilGasScientificResearchProject» Institute. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction timely notification of an impending breakdown.

The current state of the oil and gas industry in Kazakhstan
is determined by the fact that most of the oil fields are at
a late stage of development – «Brownfield», characterized
by increased water cuts, reduced average flow rates of
producing wells, and higher costs per unit of production. In
addition, the oil and gas industry is just recovering from the
post-COVID recession, which resulted in serious operating
losses for oil producers [1].
According to a report by the Annual KazMunayGas
report [2] and Analysis Centre of Kazakhstan [3] 85.7 million
tons of oil were produced, of which 30% were produced
using SRP.
In 2022 geopolitical changes in the global community had
a significant impact on global business.
In recent years, the role of technological innovation in
oil companies has increased significantly. According to
the National Company «KazMunayGas» annual report [2],
global research highlights the main trends that will have the
strongest impact on the oil and gas industry in the coming
years: the use of DARQ (D – Distributed ledger technologies,
A – Artificial intelligence, R – Extended reality, Q – Quantum)
technologies, technological identity, strengthening the
professional skills of employees with new technological
solutions, cybersecurity risk management, etc.
The problem statement of this article is to optimize
the operating costs of any oil-producing company, it is
important to prevent or minimize downtime of wells by
*E-mail: daur.aktaukenov@gmail.com
http://dx.doi.org/10.5510/OGP20240100939
The United Kingdom National Data Repository is one of
the first large oil and gas open data releases. It contains 130
terabytes of geophysical, infrastructure, field, and well data,
covering more than 12500 wellbores, 5000 seismic surveys,
and 3000 pipelines [4]. However, the presented data informa-
tion is a generalized set.
Today, the proportion of flowing wells per one million oil
and gas wells worldwide is only 5%, the rest is accounted for
by artificial lift methods [5].
Sucker rod pump units (SRP) appeared at the end of the
19th century and still keep the most common method of oil
production, figure 1. A drive of a deep rod pump is a rocking
machine, which converts the rotational movement of the
motor shaft into a reciprocating movement of the hanging
point of the rods. Currently, more than half of the wells
in countries of the former Commonwealth of Independent
States are equipped with these installations, and in some
countries, their amount reaches 90% [7].
During repair work, the wells do not produce products.
The normal operation of production wells is disrupted for
various reasons, which leads either to a complete shutdown
of the well or to a significant decrease in its production rate.
The reasons for stopping or reducing production can be very
diverse, related to the failure of underground or surface
equipment, changes in reservoir conditions, the cessation
of electricity or gas supply for gas lift wells, the cessation of
pumping and transporting fluid to the surface, etc. One way
or another, part-time the wells are idle either in anticipation
of repair or during the repair itself.
As the SRP consists of underground and surface

48
 D. Aktaukenov et al. / SOCAR Proceedings No.1 (2024) 048-056
Fig. 1. Artificial lift technique of oil production -
Sucker rod pump (Modified after [6])
equipment, in our research we consider only repairs of
underground equipment, parts 2 and 3 of figure 1.
This paper is organized as follows: the second section
contains a literature review on the topic under study, the
third section presents the data processing methodology, the
fourth section presents comparison results of the selected
processing methods, and the last sections conclude our study
with discussion and conclusion.
2. Literature review
2.1. Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
today
During the past more than 60 years, great progress has
been made in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) research.
Theories of Heuristic Searching Strategies, Non-monotonic
Reasoning, Machine Learning, etc., have been proposed.
Applications of AI, especially Expert Systems, Intelligent
Decision-Making, Intelligent Robots, Natural Language
Understanding, etc., also promoted the research of AI [8].
In the work of Hopgood he defined AI as the science
of mimicking human mental faculties in a computer [9].
AI covers a wide range of applications based on which it
has been classified from time to time [10]. In this era of
technological evolution, AI has opened abundant scope for
development in apparently all sectors, including business,
marketing, education, science and engineering, medicine,
and law.
Currently, the industry is going through what experts
have called «The Fourth Industrial Revolution», also called
Industry 4.0. The integration of these environments allows
the collection of a large amount of data that is collected
by different equipment, located in different sectors of the
factories [11].
AI technological developments in recent years have led
to a reduction in expenses related to monitoring the health of
machinery and the acquisition and storage of huge amounts
of data. The application of cutting-edge analytical models
to data provides valuable information and knowledge from
manufacturing processes, production systems, and equip-
Fig. 2. AI, ML, and DS today (Modified after [10])
ment to support strategic decision-making [12]. Quite recent-
ly, advances in computational performance have allowed the
application of Machine Learning (ML) algorithms which can
find correlations and identify patterns [12]. Li proposed an
ML approach to predict impending failures and alarms on
the examples of critical rail car components aiming at both
driving proactive inspections and repairs and reducing oper-
ational equipment failure [13].
ML approaches can handle high-dimensional and multi-
variate data, and extract hidden relationships within data in
complex and dynamic environments [14].
Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) are one of the most
common and applied ML algorithms. The main advantages
of ANN include that no expert knowledge to make decisions
is needed since they are based only on historical data.
However, some disadvantages of ANNs are: networks can
reach conclusions that deny the rules and theories established
by the applications; long training time for ANN; a huge data
set is needed for an ANN to learn correctly [15].
Figure 2 Venn diagram showing the relationship between
diversified fields of AI, ML and Data Science (DS).
2.2. Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in
Oil and Gas industry
Areas of the petroleum industry in which neural networks
can be applied are seismic pattern recognition, drill bit
diagnosis, improvement of gas well production, identification
of sandstone lithofacies, and prediction and optimization of
well performance [16].
Mehta reported a survey by General Electric and
Accenture and identified that 81% of the executives valued
deployment of Big Data as one of the top goals of the oil and
gas industry [17].
ANN – Generalized Auto-Regressive Conditional
Heteroscedasticity (ANN- GARCH) ML method is used to
predict oil price volatility [18].
Han, Jung, and Kwon used the Random Forest method
(RF) to develop a predictive model that can be used to predict
productivity during the early phase of production [19]. The
49
 D. Aktaukenov et al. / SOCAR Proceedings No.1 (2024) 048-056

Table 1
Upstream activity, tool for the application and AI approach
Activity Tool for the application Artificial Intelligence Approach
– A tool for automatically mapping reservoir rock
characteristics over an oil field – Interpolation techniques none
Evaluation of the – A program for collecting geological data from well gradient optimization
subsurface geology logs. Boosting the gradient by 100 times or more – Gradient boosting
accelerates the process. Based on photos of rock – Deep neural network
samples collected from wells, a tool for rock typing
Using real-time drilling telemetry, this tool can detect Algorithms for ML in
Drilling
the drilled rock form and possible failure combination
Reservoir Traditional reservoir simulations can be sped up with
Deep neural networks
engineering this tool
Production A data-driven method for predicting the efficacy of Gradient boosting feature
optimization well care campaigns objectively selection based on expert opinion

required datasets were obtained from 150 wells, targeting approaches [26].
shale gas, stationed at Eagle Ford shale formations [20]. Examples of works that use deep learning algorithms
Recently, Hajizadeh [21], Hanga and Kovalchuk [22] reported for Predictive Maintenance purposes include many studies
the efforts to date of applying AI in fault detection in [27, 28, 29, 30].
the oil and gas industry, suggesting ways to ensure its For example, the study proposes a fuzzy alarm system
greater adoption for strategic management and technology to predict early equipment degradation in a car production
enablement [12]. line [31], to reduce costs with sudden shutdowns. Wei, Zhao
The performance of modern electronic devices is enhanced and He propose a condition-based maintenance strategy
by increasing data processing capabilities. Table 1 represents to determine the optimal action based on the system state
the upstream activities, tools and AI approach that can be to minimize the average cost rate [32]. On the other hand,
used as per the activity in oil and gas [4]. the study developed a prognostic and health management
framework to detect sensor degradation in manufacturing
2.3. Predictive maintenance systems to optimize the maintenance schedule, reduce
Machinery maintenance has evolved from breakdown maintenance costs, avoid unnecessary downtimes and
maintenance to time-based preventive maintenance [23]. support decision-making [33].
In the literature, different nomenclature and groups of In industries, equipment maintenance affects the
maintenance management strategies can be found. Consider operation time of equipment and its efficiency. Therefore,
common categories proposed by the works Susto [24, 25]. equipment faults need to be identified and solved, to avoid a
They classify the maintenance procedures as follows: shutdown in the production processes [34].
• Run-to-Failure; A very relevant case study could be understood from
• Preventive Maintenance; the data strategy of big oil and gas corporations like Royal
• Predictive Maintenance. Dutch Shell. The company uses big data to form a strategy,
Predictive Maintenance advantages include: maximizing wherein there is minimum downtime and failures which can
the time of use and operation of equipment, delaying/ otherwise happen without perfecting the timing of equip-
reducing maintenance activities, and reducing material and ment maintenance which is prone to wear and tear. This is all
labor costs [15]. done by sensors connected at different ends of the machines,
According to the study, maintenance approaches able where aggregated data is compared with the ongoing per-
to monitor equipment conditions for diagnostic and prog- formance and defunct parts can be replaced with minimum
nostic purposes can be grouped into three main categories: downtime [35]. Royal Dutch Shell is one of the largest oil and
statistical approaches, AI approaches, and model-based gas companies – one of the «supermajors» which also include
BP, Chevron, Total, and ExxonMobil – and the world’s fourth
largest company by revenue. For some time now it has
Table 2
Production expenses in 2021* been developing the idea of the «data-driven oilfield» in an
attempt to bring down the cost of drilling for oil [35].
Payroll 310 672 44.83%
Predictive analytics will not only help us pinpoint the
Repair and maintenance 116 151 16.76% right hotspots but will also reduce our drilling time giving a
Energy 98 258 14.18% very smooth oil extraction process [36].
Transportation costs 45 599 6.58% National Company «KazMunayGas» (KMG) is
Short-term lease expenses 28 213 4.07% Kazakhstan’s leading oil and gas company, operating assets
across the entire production cycle from exploration and
Others 94 138 13.58%
production of hydrocarbons to transportation, refining, and
693 031 100% provision of services. KMG production expenses (million
*Independent auditor's report of KMG from Ernst & Young LLP Kazakhstani Tenge) in 2021 are shown in table 2.
which comprises the consolidated financial position as of According to table 2, the second highest expense of all
31 December 2021 (see «KMG financial report» [2]) annual Production Expenditures in the fields of Kazakhstan

50
 D. Aktaukenov et al. / SOCAR Proceedings No.1 (2024) 048-056
is related to Well workover and Maintenance services.
The Kimberlite study found that operators using a
predictive, data-driven approach to maintenance experience
36% less unplanned downtime than those with a reactive
approach. Today, only 3-5 % of oil and gas equipment
is sensors connected. Operators can implement analytics-
based work management programs, using predictive
maintenance to repair vital equipment before it breaks
down, reducing downtime and increasing production [37].
Thus, a good maintenance strategy should improve the
equipment condition, reduce the equipment failure rates and
minimize maintenance costs, while maximizing the life of the
equipment [15].
3. Methodology
There are a lot of modeling techniques based on ML and AI:
Logistic Regression; Random Forest; Naïve Bayesian classifier;
Decision Tree; Artificial neural network; Bayesian Belief
Networks; Support Vector Machine; Principal Component
Analysis; Gradient boosted machine; Genetic algorithm;
Fuzzy logic and others. Some of them are explainable but
with low accuracy, and others have high accuracy but are
hard to run and explain. In this research, we used the first
three of them due to their prevalence and convenience for the
analysis of our imbalanced data. The algorithms used in this
work are presented in table 3.
Logistic Regression is one of the most important statistical
and data mining techniques employed by researchers for the
analysis and classification of binary datasets [38, 39, 40].
Regression is generally applied when the input and output
variables are continuous. And logistic regression works best
when the output variable takes on only two values. The
importance of logistic regression is that many data analysis
problems can be solved using binary classification or reduced
to it. Using logistic regression, it is possible to estimate some
event’s probability of occurrence (or non-occurrence): the
well is working (broken). This makes logistic regression a
powerful decision-support tool.
Random Forest is a widely used representative ensemble
learning method combining Bagging and random feature
selection. The term «random» refers to generating n sub-
dataset by randomly sampling with replacement and
randomly removing some features of each sub-dataset. The
term «forest» means that sub-classifiers are decision trees.
The prediction results are based on a voting mechanism [41].
These classifiers often give better predictions but they are
not explainable and not easy to use.
Classification of supervised learning algorithms
Algorithms Concept and principle
LR transforms its output using the
Logistic Regression
logistic sigmoid function to return
(LR)
a probability value
Random forest Algorithm integrated by multiple
(RF) decision trees
Based on the knowledge of probability
Naive Bayes statistics, calculate the probability that the
Classification sample to be tested belongs to each catego-
(NBC) ry, and use the category with the highest
probability as the category of this sample
Naïve Bayesian classifier is a classifier that calculates a set
of probabilities by counting the frequency and combinations
of values in a given set of data. The algorithm uses Bayes’
theorem and assumes that all features are independent given
the value of the class variable. This assumption of conditional
independence is rarely applicable in real-world applications,
so it is characterized as naive, nevertheless, the algorithm
tends to learn quickly in various supervised classification
problems [42].
In Oil and Gas production, most production activities
are achieved by a group of machines, which collect data and
only a minority of them are valuable. First, healthy condition
accounts for the majority of the long-term operation of
machines, while faults seldom happen. Consequently, it
is easier to collect healthy data than faulty data. Second,
the quality of the collected data is not always satisfactory
because some of them may suffer from emergencies, such as
transmission interruption and the anomaly of measurement
devices [43].
The proposed methodology based on ML follows the
following five steps: data collection, data preprocessing
and partitioning, model selection, parameter tuning and
prediction, model evaluation, and visual analysis [44].
3.1. Data set
The accuracy of the Predictive Maintenance model has
been tested on a real industrial production dataset. The
dataset was provided by one of the subsidiaries of the
National Company «KazMunayGas», which is a major oil
and gas-producing company in Kazakhstan. The analysed
data contains production information about oil production
in the period from 1 January 2020 to 31 March 2022.
Production data, as well as any other information obtained
through processing, generalization, or analytical calculations,
is equated to confidential information of the company owner.
In this work, the name of the oilfield, the operator of the
oil production, and well-by-well information will remain
anonymous.
The Dataset contains the following information in figure 3.
A – General production information about unique ~4000
oilwells including the number of wells and their location;
B – Technological regime of oilwells;
C – Daily oil production indications: Extracted liquid
(m3/day), Product water cut (%), Extracted oil (t/day).
In general, more data leads to more reliable models
and, consequently, better results. However, data should be
representative of the analysed process [12].
Table 3
Advantage Disadvantage
It can only be used to predict
It is very fast
discrete functions. Hence, the
at classifying
dependent variable of LR is
unknown records.
bound to the discrete number set
Strong anti-
Slower execution
jamming ability
The prediction effect is poor for
Simple logic; low
samples with high attribute rel-
false positive rate
evance
51
 D. Aktaukenov et al. / SOCAR Proceedings No.1 (2024) 048-056

Technological regime 01.01.2020

№ Oil field Oil well Condition
Q liquid, m Water cut, % Q oil, t/day Q liquid, m
3 3
Water cut, % Q oil, t/day
1 XXX №_2651 in idle 5 55 1.89 4 60 1.5
2 XXX №_0392 in work 60 70 15.11 69 60.21 23.03894
3 XXX №_0567 in work 70 92 4.7 66 94.23 3.19659
4 XXX №_0568 in work 35 90 2.94 34 88.27 3.34761
5 XXX №_0584 in work 30 92 2.02 30 92 2.0136

Fig. 3. Dataset

3.2. Data collection and preparation procedure
Though, we need to determine whether there is a statistical
relationship or correlation between the variables if we choose
to predict the value of one using the other. However,
precision needs to be maintained in the sense, that how close
the predicted values are to the observed ones. The predictions
need to be both unbiased and close to the actual values [45].
The distribution by type of repairs for the analysed period
at the oil field of the Kazakhstani investigated oil company is
shown in figure 4.
The vast majority of repairs are pump changes. This
number includes both planned and unplanned repairs.
Figure 5 shows an example of normal well operation
#9445 with low volatility of oil production.
In this example, we observe that a decrease in the
performance of the fluid pump by more than 50% and oil by
40% of the well mode is a trigger for well repair works.
Figure 6 shows an example of abnormal well operation
#9696 with the high volatility of oil production which leads
to oilwell failure.

Fig. 4. Distribution of repairs

Fig. 5. Normal well operation #9445

Fig. 6. Abnormal well operation #9696

52
 D. Aktaukenov et al. / SOCAR Proceedings No.1 (2024) 048-056

Workover operations at the well are preceded by high
fluctuations without pronounced directional dynamics.
As evidenced by the few research articles emerging
recently that have explored correlations between oil and
stock markets, high stock market volatility precedes a period
of high economic uncertainty [46]. In our research, there is a
correlation between the high volatility of oil production and
the onset of oilwell workover.
3.3. Data analysis
The main goal of our analysis is to use data for daily
production readings for the past W days, we are trying to
predict well failures ∆ days in advance, figure 7.
To prepare the models, we used train-test approaches. In
the train-test approach, the split of the data was 50% and 50%
for training and test processes, respectively. The raw input
data were randomly split into two datasets: training and test
datasets.
The classification model predicts the class of each data
pattern by assigning each sample its predicted label (positive
or negative). A positive label for a well means that this well
is operating normally. A negative label for a well means that
this well is under repair. These labels are assigned for each
day (∆ in advance) based on the value of oil output in the
previous W days.
Therefore, at the end of the classification we compute
following model results as in study [47]:
• True Positives (TP);
• False Negatives (FN);
• True Negatives (TN);
• False Positives (FP).
Once we have these values, we can compute the overall
accuracy of our predictive model as the fraction of correctly
predicted labels in the data set:
TP + TN
Accuracy =
TP + TN + FP + FN
We can also compute additional metrics such as precision,
recall, and F1-score that are widely used in evaluating
performances of prediction models [41]:
TP
Recall = ∑ ,
TP + FN
TP
Precision = ∑ , (2)
TP + FP
2 × Recall × Precision
F1 =
Recall + Precision
We should note that our data set is highly imbalanced -
over 90% have positive labels (on average 3 days per month
each oilwell is under repair, respectively 10% of negative
labels). For such imbalanced data, it is important to consider
F1 as the additional metric for comparing different predictive
models.
4. Results
The novelty of this research is the application of ML for
preventive diagnostics on the basis of oil flow rate output,
to be exact the detection of data fluctuations that reflect the
quality of SRP process.
The results of this work show that the model allows us to
correctly detect oilwell deviation trends and generate failure
prediction alerts as a maintenance decision support system
for operators to prevent possible incoming failures. We
present and compare results using three models.
4.1. Result with Logistic Regression
Logistic Regression is easier to implement, and interpret,
and very efficient to train, even for production personnel in
the field. Therefore, we took Logistic Regression as the basis
for the main indicator of accuracy, table 4.
The highest percentage of accuracy was achieved by the
standard deviation of 14-days of oil production and predicted
(1) 7 days before failure. Despite the fact that accuracy results
may be lower than other classifiers, Logistic Regression

Fig. 7. Analysis

Table 4
Result 1 - Logistic Regression Accuracy
Logistic W=7 W = 14
Regression ∆=7 ∆ = 14 ∆ = 21 ∆=7 ∆ = 14 ∆ = 21
σ (Oil) 70% 69% 68% 72% 71% 70%
σ (Oil)/μ 60% 59% 59% 57% 57% 56%
Slope Oil 53% 53% 53% 53% 53% 53%
σ (Concentration) 62% 62% 61% 64% 63% 63%
F1-score (Oil) 62% 61% 60% 66% 65% 64%

53
 D. Aktaukenov et al. / SOCAR Proceedings No.1 (2024) 048-056

Although the Accuracy is higher than LR result, Naïve

Bayesian F1-score results turned out to be slightly worse than
the rest because it is more complex in calculation samples
with high attribute relevance. Thus, this classifier cannot be
representative due to its complexity of data processing and
labelling.

Fig. 8. The standard deviation of Q oil.
W = 14 days, ∆ = 7 days
classifier results are the most relevant for our study because
it is the simplest to calculate and easily interpret.
Figure 8 shows the labelling distribution of the Standard
deviation of Oil production. One of the attractive futures of
LR is the possibility to compute the probabilities. This would
allow an oil manager not only to identify future failures but
to rank and priorities them.
4.2. Result with Random Forrest
The Random Forest accuracy percentage result shown in
table 5.
The highest percentage of accuracy was achieved by the
Standard deviation of 7-days of oil production and predicted
7 days before failure. But this difficult to use in practice.
4.3. Result with Naïve Bayesian classifier
Naïve Bayesian classifier accuracy percentage result
shown in table 6.
The highest percentage of accuracy was achieved by the
coefficient of variation (the ratio of the standard deviation σ
to the mean μ) of 14-days oil production and predicted 7 days
before failure.
5. Discussion
Most of the research works in the field of maintenance
prediction are based on the approach of studying input data
- measurements of vibration sensors, condition of pumping
machine engine, corrosion sensors, underground equipment
condition diagnostics, etc. The distinguishing feature of our
study is based on the output data - our prediction calculations
are based on oil production indications.
The purpose of this work was not to find a high-precision
accurate ML model, but to show how using a simple and
intuitive ML algorithm, to achieve good oilwell failure
prediction results aiming at performing agile and informed
decision-making. Our results can be used by oil workers
without experience in ML allowing one to predict failures
and rank oil wells based on failure probabilities.
In our model, in addition to prediction, it is also possible
to evaluate and rank each oilwell separately for the possibility
of failure.
The strength of this study is the use of oil flow rate
output data, which has been applied not only to total pro-
duction but also to process equipment diagnostics. A com-
parative analysis of the results in terms of time intervals
(7 days/ 14 days/ 21 days) showed anomalies and deviations
that indicate the life cycle of equipment and provide an
opportunity to improve the paradigm of run-to-fail control
algorithms for the careful use of equipment.
The weakness of this study is that using data from one oil
field area for comparison, it will be good to use data from all
the fields that exist in Kazakhstan, which has technological
specifics such as a high percentage of water cut, but in
general, it did not detract from the results of the study.

Table 5
Result 2 - Random Forrest Accuracy

Logistic W=7 W = 14
Regression ∆=7 ∆ = 14 ∆ = 21 ∆=7 ∆ = 14 ∆ = 21
σ (Oil) 82% 79% 78% 80% 78% 76%
σ (Oil)/μ 82% 80% 78% 81% 79% 77%
Slope Oil 82% 80% 78% 80% 78% 76%
σ (Concentration) 79% 70% 75% 79% 77% 75%
F1-score (Oil) 73% 82% 80% 82% 81% 80%

Table 6
Result 3 - Naïve Bayesian Accuracy
W=7 W = 14
Naïve Bayesian
∆=7 ∆ = 14 ∆ = 21 ∆=7 ∆ = 14 ∆ = 21
σ (Oil) 64% 63% 63% 66% 65% 65%
σ (Oil)/μ 66% 63% 62% 77% 74% 73%
Slope Oil 54% 53% 53% 53% 53% 53%
σ (Concentration) 59% 58% 58% 61% 61% 60%
F1-score (Oil) 45% 44% 43% 51% 50% 50%

54
 D. Aktaukenov et al. / SOCAR Proceedings No.1 (2024) 048-056

Conclusion
Nowadays production wells are potential sources of oil spills or emissions of harmful substances into the
atmosphere, which may cause environmental pollution. Emergencies only increase this impact. Accidental
spills and leaks from oilwells pollute the soil, surface, and ground waters, disturb soil and water environments.
Therefore, the timely prevention of breakdowns of technological downhole equipment during operation
indirectly helps to reduce environmental pollution.
The global upstream Oil and Gas industry has the opportunity to capitalize on ML algorithms. The current
environment in the oil upstream industry provides an opportunity to implement new technologies, predictive
models, and decision-making processes, based on data, to improve performance and reduce production costs.
The study’s key findings have significant implications for the oil production industry, particularly in Sucker
Rod Pumping. The study provides insights for developing a preventive diagnostics system that serves as both
a decision-support tool and an enhanced management system to optimize costs associated with oil production.
The article’s primary focus is developing an intelligent model for diagnosing SRPs, enabling predictive fault
detection throughout specific operational lifecycles. The model displays an accuracy rate of approximately
70%, empowering the oil and gas industry to implement preventive measures to avert breakdowns, mitigate
environmental pollution, and optimize costs. Based on the results of our model, we can identify potential well
failure 7 days before shutdown with a high degree of probability.
Overall, this study can potentially revolutionize the Oil and Gas industry by offering a constructive
approach to addressing environmental concerns while enhancing operational efficiency and reducing costs.
By prioritizing preventive measures, the industry can positively impact the environment while reaping the
benefits of cost savings and improved productivity. Additionally, the study identifies system errors within
automated control systems. Future iterations will include visualizing all rod pumps on a cluster basis to
facilitate comprehensive analysis of preventive diagnostics.

We gratefully thank JSC «Center for International Programs» for providing the research internship within the
Bolashak International Scholarship.
Our sincere thanks also go to the National Company «KazMunayGas» for the opportunity to conduct research in the
field of Oil and Gas in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

References
1. Omirbekova, Z., Aktaukenov, D., Amangeldiyev, A., Abdallah, A. (2021). Developing predictive oil well diagnostics
based on intelligent algorithms. In: 2021 ieee International Conference on Smart Information Systems and Technologies.
2. (2021). Kazmunaygas Annual Report. https://www.kmg.kz/
3. (2022). Analysis of the Republic of Kazakhstan oil and gas industry for the 2021 year. https://iacng.kz/
4. Sircar, A., Yadav, K., Rayavarapu, K., et al. (2021). Application of machine learning and artificial intelligence in oil and
gas industry. Petroleum Research, 6(4), 379-391.
5. Shlumberger - https://www.slb.ru/services/artificial lift/
6. Takacs, G. (2015). Sucker-rod pumping handbook: production engineering fundamentals and long-stroke rod
pumping. Gulf Professional Publishing.
7. Bubnov, M. V., Zyuzev, A. M. (2016). Tools for diagnosing equipment of sucker rod pump units. In: First Scientific and
Technical Conference of Young Scientists of the Ural Energy Institute. Yekaterinburg.
8. Shi, Z. (2019). Advanced artificial intelligence. Vol. 4. World Scientific Publishing.
9. Hopgood, A. A. (2005). The state of artificial intelligence. Advances in Computers, 65, 1–75.
10. Pandey, R. K., Dahiya, A. K., Mandal, A. (2021). Identifying applications of machine learning and data analytics based
approaches for optimization of upstream petroleum operations. Energy Technology, 9(1), 2000749.
11. Borgi, T., Hidri, A., Neef, B., Naceur, M. S. (2017). Data analytics for predictive maintenance of industrial robots. In:
2017 International Conference on Advanced Systems and Electric Technologies (IC ASET).
12. Orr`u, P. F., Zoccheddu, A., Sassu, L., et al. (2020). Machine learning approach using mlp and svm algorithms for the
fault prediction of a centrifugal pump in the oil and gas industry. Sustainability, 12(11), 4776.
13. Li, H., Parikh, D., He, Q., et al. (2014). Improving rail network velocity: A machine learning approach to predictive
maintenance. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 45, 17–26.
14. Wuest, T., Weimer, D., Irgens, C., Thoben, K.-D. (2016). Machine learning in manufacturing: advantages, challenges,
and applications. Production & Manufacturing Research, 4 (1), 23–45.
15. Carvalho, T. P., Soares, F. A., Vita, R., et al. (2019). A systematic literature review of machine learning methods applied
to predictive maintenance. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 137, 106024.
16. Ali, J. (1994). Neural networks: a new tool for the petroleum industry? SPE-27561-MS. In: European Petroleum Computer
Conference, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
17. Mehta, A. (2016). Tapping the value from big data analytics. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 68 (12), 40–41.

55
 D. Aktaukenov et al. / SOCAR Proceedings No.1 (2024) 048-056

18. Kristjanpoller, W., Minutolo, M. C. (2016). Forecasting volatility of oil price using an artificial neural network-garch
model. Expert Systems with Applications, 65, 233–241.
19. Han, D., Jung, J., Kwon, S. (2020). Comparative study on supervised learning models for productivity forecasting of
shale reservoirs based on a data-driven approach. Applied Sciences, 10(4), 1267.
20. Tadjer, A., Hong, A., Bratvold, R. B. (2021). Machine learning based decline curve analysis for short-term oil
production forecast. Energy Exploration & Exploitation, 39 (5), 1747–1769.
21. Hajizadeh, Y. (2019). Machine learning in oil and gas; a swot analysis approach. Journal of Petroleum Science and
Engineering, 176, 661–663.
22. Hanga, K. M., Kovalchuk, Y. (2019). Machine learning and multi-agent systems in oil and gas industry applications:
A survey. Computer Science Review, 34, 100191.
23. Scheffer, C., Girdhar, P. (2004). Practical machinery vibration analysis and predictive maintenance. Elsevier.
24. Susto, G. A., Beghi, A., De Luca, C. (2012). A predictive maintenance system for epitaxy processes based on filtering
and prediction techniques. IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, 25 (4), 638–649.
25. Susto, G. A., Schirru, A., Pampuri, S., et al. (2014). Machine learning for predictive maintenance: A multiple classifier
approach. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 11 (3), 812–820.
26. Jardine, A. K., Lin, D., Banjevic, D. (2006). A review on machinery diagnostics and prognostics implementing
condition-based maintenance. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 20(7), 1483–1510.
27. Amihai, I., Gitzel, R., Kotriwala, A. M., et al. (2018). An industrial case study using vibration data and machine
learning to predict asset health. In: 2018 IEEE 20th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), 1, 178–185.
28. Butte, S., Prashanth, A., Patil, S. (2018). Machine learning based predictive maintenance strategy: a super learning
approach with deep neural networks. In: 2018 IEEE Workshop on Microelectronics and Electron Devices (WMED).
29. Luo, B., Wang, H., Liu, H., et al. (2018). Early fault detection of machine tools based on deep learning and dynamic
identification. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 66(1), 509–518.
30. Mathew, J., Luo, M., Pang, C. K. (2017). Regression kernel for prognostics with support vector machines. In: 2017 22nd
IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA).
31. Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R. A., Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2019). Fuzzy early warning systems for condition based
maintenance. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 128, 736–746.
32. Wei, G., Zhao, X., He, S., He, Z. (2019). Reliability modeling with condition-based maintenance for binary-state
deteriorating systems considering zoned shock effects. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 130, 282–297.
33. Dong, Y., Xia, T., Fang, X., et al. (2019). Prognostic and health management for adaptive manufacturing systems with
online sensors and flexible structures. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 133, 57–68.
34. Wan, J., Tang, S., Li, D., et al. (2017). A manufacturing big data solution for active preventive maintenance. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 13 (4), 2039–2047.
35. Marr, B. (2015). Big data in big oil: how shell uses analytics to drive business success. Forbes May.
36. Desai, J. N., Pandian, S., Vij, R. K. (2021). Big data analytics in upstream oil and gas industries for sustainable
exploration and development: A review. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 21, 101186.
37. Mathew, B. (2016). How big data is reducing costs and improving performance in the upstream industry. World Oil.
38. Agresti, A. (2018). An introduction to categorical data analysis. John Wiley &Sons.
39. Hilbe, J. M. (2009). Logistic regression models. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
40. Hosmer Jr, D. W., Lemeshow, S., Sturdivant, R. X. (2013). Applied logistic regression. Vol. 398. John Wiley & Sons.
41. Dong, S.-Q., Sun, Y.-M., Xu, T., et al. (2022). How to improve machine learning models for lithofacies identification
by practical and novel ensemble strategy and principles. Petroleum Science, 20(2), 733-752.
42. Saritas, M. M., Yasar, A. (2019). Performance analysis of ANN and Naive bayes classification algorithm for data
classification. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering, 7(2), 88–91.
43. Lei, Y., Yang, B., Jiang, X., et al. (2020). Applications of machine learning to machine fault diagnosis: A review and
roadmap. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 138, 106587.
44. Hong, B.-Y., Liu, S.-N., Li, X.-P., et al. (2022). A liquid loading prediction method of gas pipeline based on machine
learning. Petroleum Science, 19(6), 3004-3015.
45. Making predictions with regression analysis. https://statisticsbyjim.com/regression/predictions-regression/
46. Zhao, W., Wang, Y.-D. (2022). On the time-varying correlations between oil-, gold-, and stock markets: The
heterogeneous roles of policy uncertainty in the US and China. Petroleum Science, 19(3), 1420–1432.
47. Chicco, D., Jurman, G. (2020). The advantages of the matthews correlation coefficient (mcc) over f1 score and accuracy
in binary classification evaluation. BMC Genomics, 21(1), 1–13.

56