Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Petroleum
journal homepage: www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/petlm

A data-driven approach to predict compressional and shear wave

velocities in reservoir rocks
Teslim Olayiwola a, Oluseun A. Sanuade b, *
a
College of Petroleum Engineering and Geosciences, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
b
Boone Pickens School of Geology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Compressional and shear wave velocities (Vp and Vs respectively) are essential reservoir parameters that
Received 8 September 2019 can be used to delineate lithology, calculate porosity, identify reservoir fluids, evaluate fracture and
Received in revised form calculate mechanical properties of rocks. In this study, the potential application of intelligent systems in
12 June 2020
predicting Vp and Vs of reservoir rocks is presented. To date, considerable efforts are being carried out to
Accepted 17 July 2020
obtain the best set of parameters capable of predicting Vp and Vs with a high degree of accuracy. Three
intelligent models namely artificial neural network (ANN), adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system
Keywords:
(ANFIS) and least square support vector machine (LSSVM) were used in this study. The different models
Artificial intelligent
Shear wave
were based on the available information sourced from wireline log data. Parametric studies showed that
ANFIS measured depth, neutron porosity, gamma-ray, and density log data are vital in predicting both Vp and
Reservoir rocks Vs. In developing the models, a comprehensive dataset available from one of the oil fields in the Nor-
wegian North Basin was used. In evaluating the different models, two different statistical parameters
namely Pearson’s correlation coefficient (R2) and root mean square error (RMSE) were considered. It was
found that the LSSVM model is the most accurate technique for predicting both Vp and Vs. LSSVM model
predicted the Vp with R2 and RSME of 0.9706 and 0.0893 respectively. In addition, the model showed an
excellent accuracy level in the prediction of Vs with R2 and RMSE of 0.9991 and 0.0457 respectively. The
proposed approach, if implemented, is crucial for geoscientists, reservoir and drilling engineers working
on reservoir characterization and drilling operations.
© 2020 Southwest Petroleum University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi
Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction
Compressional and shear wave velocities (Vp and Vs respec-
tively) are very important parameters in hydrocarbon fields espe-
cially in characterizing and evaluating reservoir, identification of
the pore types and estimation of the dynamic properties of rocks
[1e11]. In addition, some attributes that are related to Vp and Vs are
applicable in analysing time-lapse seismic data, detecting fractures
in reservoirs and obtaining subsurface images especially in sedi-
ments that are filled with gas [12e14].
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sheunsky@gmail.com (O.A. Sanuade).
Peer review under responsibility of Southwest Petroleum University.
Production and Hosting by Elsevier on behalf of KeAi
However, shear sonic logs (from where Vs can be estimated) are
not usually acquired as part of the set of logs in most practices.
Hence, Vs is usually estimated from analysis of core samples and
using tools such as dipole sonic imager (DSI) which are quite
expensive, relatively difficult, time-consuming, and most of the DSI
tools are not readily accessible in wells [15]. Likewise, the acquisi-
tion of compressional sonic logs, where Vp can be estimated, is
expensive, time-consuming and only few points can be sampled.
These, and many reasons have limit the use of acoustic measure-
ments in rock physics. To overcome these challenges, many ap-
proaches have been proposed to estimate Vp and Vs from other
accessible data.
Empirical relations between Vp-Vs and petrophysical data have
been suggested by various researchers [1,15e17,24e32]. However,
most of these relations are site-specific and only applicable to
sandstone reservoirs. Meanwhile, many carbonate reservoirs exist
all over the world, and these empirical relations cannot be used to
predict Vp and Vs from other petrophysical data.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2020.07.008
2405-6561/© 2020 Southwest Petroleum University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade
In the last few decades, artificial intelligence (AI) and optimi-
zation algorithms have been employed for prediction purposes
such as predictions of reservoir and fluid properties [33e38],
moisture content [39,40], and compressive and tensile strengths of
rocks [41] among others. AI has been explicitly used to solve
problems in geosciences and petroleum engineering, especially
those that are related to optimization and prediction of reservoir
characteristics. For example, Ahmadi et al. [42] used artificial neural
network (ANN) to predict density of drilling fluids at downhole
conditions. Aizenberg et al. [43] employed multilayer neural
network with multi-valued neurons to estimate oil production in
the Gulf of Mexico. Olatunji et al. [44] developed a hybrid model
with several fuzzy logic (FL) systems for the modelling of formation
permeability and PVT properties for hydrocarbon reservoir. Anifo-
wose and Abdulraheem [45] used fuzzy logic and support vector
regression (SVR) analysis to characterize oil and gas reservoirs.
Bhatt and Helle [46] used ANN to predict porosity and permeability
from petrophysical data. Kamari et al. [47] used least square sup-
port vector machine (LSSVM) to predict permeability in hydrocar-
bon reservoirs.
Moreover, AI systems and optimization algorithms have been
specifically used to predict Vp and Vs from petrophysical data. For
instance, Eskandari et al. [48] utilized multiple regression and ANN
analyses for the prediction of Vs from well log data. Rezaee et al.
[49] used FL, neuro-fuzzy and ANN for the prediction of Vs from
wireline log data in a sandstone reservoir of the Carnavon Basin,
Australia. Rajabi et al. [6] predicted Vp,Vs and Stoneley wave ve-
locity (Vst) from petrophysical data using genetic algorithms (GA),
FL and neuro-fuzzy techniques in a carbonate reservoir in Iran. In
addition, Zoveidavianpoor et al. [50] predicted Vp using adaptive
neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and linear regression.
Asoodeh and Bagheripour [51] also employed ANN, FL and neuro-
fuzzy algorithms for the prediction of Vs, Vp and Vst from conven-
tional well log. Nourafkan and Kadkhodaie-Ilkhchi [52] estimated
Vs from petrophysical data using ant colony optimization (ACO)
algorithm. Hadi and Nygaard [53] used regression and ANN ana-
lyses to predict Vs from well log data in a well from SE Iraq. Ane-
mangely et al. [54] used the combination of LSSVM, particle swarm
optimization (PSO), GA and Cuckoo optimization algorithm to
predict Vs from petrophysical logs in Ahwaz oilfield located in the
southeast of Iran.
Therefore, in this study, ANN, ANFIS and LSSVM optimized with
Coupled Swarm Algorithm were used to predict Vp and Vs from
wireline logs. Prior to developing the model, we carried out para-
metric studies to determine the best parameters to be used for the
prediction of both Vp and Vs. The algorithms were then applied on a
dataset from Volve field in Norwegian North Basin [55].
2. Algorithms
In this section, we present the summary of the history, guiding
principles and mathematical basis behind the three different
algorithms.
2.1. Artificial neural network
This is a form of AI system based on the attempts at the math-
ematical representation of the biological neural network [56e58].
This form of AI system has found numerous applications in pre-
dictive analytics because of its parallel simple operational element
capable of modelling complex problems [59]. In 1943, McColloch
and Pitts published the basic principle of ANN [58] and later,
Hopfield [60] proposed the backpropagation algorithm. The archi-
tecture of ANN consists of single to several neurons coded using
different mathematical functions and are scattered throughout the
200
Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208
various hidden layers. In any ANN model, there exist three regions
(layers) namely input, hidden and output. Based on the objective of
the study, the number of layers range from one to many and can be
classified under the umbrella ranging from a simple (i.e. single
input - single output) to a complex (i.e. multiple inputs e multiple-
output) system. In obtaining the relationship between the selected
parameters, a typical ANN model undergoes a process called
’learning’. Here, the system adjusts the weights of the different
neurons intending to minimize the magnitude of error, i.e. the
difference between the predicted and the target. To train ANN
model, there are different learning algorithms [50]. The most
widely used learning algorithm is the Backpropagation introduced
by Hopfield in 1980. Fig. 1 illustrates the pictorial representation of
a typical ANN with multiple inputs (X1, X2, X3), two hidden layers
(hidden layer 1 and 2) and one output (y). More information about
the science behind the working principle of the artificial neural
network can be found in the following literature [60e64].
2.2. Fuzzy logic system
Fuzzy logic systems are also referred to as fuzzy inference sys-
tems or fuzzy-rule-based systems [65]. A rule-based fuzzy infer-
ence system is expressed in an IF A THEN B form where A (i.e.
Antecedent) and B (i.e. consequent) depicts the relevant member-
ship functions [66,67] which in terms of simplicity and speed is
represented by a suitable curve [66]. In any inference system, the
modelling procedure is carried out by mapping the feature, i.e.
inputs to the outputs using fuzzy logic approach [65]. Based on the
consequent proposition, there exist three different forms of fuzzy-
based models namely Takagi-Sugeno type [68], Fuzzy relational
type [67,69] and Mamdani type [67,70]. The main difference be-
tween the Takagi-Sugeno and Mamdani fuzzy type depends on the
presence of fuzzy sets in the antecedents and consequents [67]. In
this study, we considered the fuzzy logic of the Takagi-Sugeno
model. Fig. 2 illustrates a typical four-layered Takagi-Sugeno
fuzzy logic system with inputs (x, y), outputs (f), weight (w) and
fuzzy sets (A, B). Further explanation on the ANFIS algorithm can be
found in previously published literatures [4,65,71e77].
2.3. Least squared support vector machine
Support vector machines (SVM), are also referred to as support
vector networks [78]. SVM belongs to the supervised learning class
of machine learning models that have found applications in both
regression and classification problems. This model approach at-
tempts to map a given set of data into another higher dimensional
feature space [79] and has a general goal of finding the function
with the least deviation [80]. The mathematical equation of a
Fig. 1. A typical Neural Network architecture.
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade
Fig. 2. A typical fuzzy logic system representation.
typical SVM model with input (x), weight vector (w), bias (b) and
target (y) is given by Eq. (1).
y ¼ f ðxÞ ¼ w,x þ b
In obtaining the least deviation between the input and target,
the SVM minimize the error between the training data using the
convex optimization approach, i.e. quadratic programming written
as equation (2) [80].
1 2 1 XN
minimize w þ g d2
2 2 i¼1 i
subject to yi ¼ wT 4ðxi Þ þ b þ di
In Equation (2), 4ðxi Þ, di , g and N represent the nonlinear
function mapping the input into the higher dimensional feature
space, error in the data point i, SVM tuning parameter and number
of sample points respectively.
In an attempt to eliminate the shortcomings associated with the
use of early SVM model, Suykens and Vandewalle [79] proposed a
less complicated and time-efficient version called the Least-square
Support vector machine (LSSVM). The LSSVM approach involves
applying set of linear solutions to regression problems rather than
the quadratic programming used by the original SVM model
Fig. 3. Summary of the different stages in the research.
Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208
[81e83]. The LSSVM has a similar equation of the form defined as
Equation (3). In equation (3), ai and K (x, xi) represent the support
values and kernel function between two points (x, xi) respectively.
X
N
yi ¼ ai Kðx; xi Þ þ b (3)
i
In obtaining the solution to the LSSVM model, the specification
of the kernel function that satisfies Mercier condition is desired
[84]. As reported in many literatures, there are many kernel func-
tions, and this is not limited to linear, polynomial, radial basis,
spline, and sigmoid [73]. Among the different kernel functions,
polynomial and radial basis functions represent the most widely
used kernel types [68,73,74]. In this study, we consider the radial
basis kernel function (RBF) type due to its high degree of accuracy
and computational efficiency. The RBF has two tuning parameters
namely squared variance of Gaussian function, i.e. RBF width and its
kernel function are represented mathematically by equation (4).
Details about the working principle of the LSSVM and CSA algo-
rithms can be found in the literatures [79,82,83,86e90].
 
  xi  xj 2
K xi ; xj ¼ exp  (4)
(1) s
In this study, we applied another optimization called Coupled
Simulated Annealing (CSA) in tuning the two LSSVM model pa-
rameters i.e. s2 and g in order to obtain a model with the least
deviation. In tuning the model parameters, an objective function,
i.e. means square error (MSE) between the estimated targets and
actual values, as expressed in Equation (5), was applied.
1 XN
(2)
MSE ¼ ½Predicted  Actual2 (5)
N i¼1
3. Methodology
In this study, a procedure was applied to select the set of fea-
tures that gives the best representation of the two understudy
targets. Fig. 3 shows the different stages implemented in this study.
Accordingly, we study the relationship between the parameters,
select the best features, normalize the data and apply the various
prediction models. In the following subsections, we explained the
procedures and the obtained results.
201
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208

Table 1 3.1. Data selection and description

The statistical description of the selected data.

Parameter Unit min max mean std Range As previously mentioned, this study intends to develop a better
MD ft 9799.541 11948.16 10872.65 621.0037 2148.622
approach to map the relationship between the selected data that
GR gAPI 5.6702 587.0172 63.10204 0.919214 581.347 are known to be widely available during the drilling operation.
RHOB g/cm3 1.9806 2.9315 2.513677 0.001373 0.9509 Massive dataset available from the Volve field in the Norwegian
NPHI % 4.23 59.32 16.98885 0.127078 55.09 North Sea were considered [91]. Among the selected data include
RES-SHT ohms-m 0.1974 5464.369 4.051446 0.844611 5464.172
the petrophysical log information (wireline log measured depth,
RES-MED ohms-m 0.1425 46224.45 12.8717 7.405757 46224.31
RES-DEP ohms-m 0.2349 2189.603 3.853179 0.485773 2189.368 MD; density log, RHOB; Gamma ray, GR; Neutron porosity, NPHI;
CAL ft 8.4688 8.8749 8.628403 0.000477 0.4061 Shallow resistivity, RES-SHT; Medium resistivity, RES-MID; Deep
Vp km/s 2.622351 5.191646 4.079319 0.006404 2.569296 resistivity, RES-DEP) and acoustic data (Vp and Vs) (Table 1). Pre-
Vs km/s 1.398358 3.145488 2.271702 0.004049 1.74713
vious research works have reported that both Vp and Vs have strong
dependence on the data obtained from conventional wireline logs
[2,52,92]. Table 1 also summarizes the 6526 available datasets
collated from both limestone and marlstone formations and the
measure of spread of the data used in this study.

3.2. Feature selection

In developing any predictive model, it is desirable to select the

best set of features with a high correlation between them and the
target. To investigate the significance of all the selected features in
predicting Vp and Vs, we applied a strategy involving the use of
correlational analysis. This method involves determining the
Pearson’s coefficient of correlation (R or corr) given by Eq. (6). In the
equation, x, x, y and y represents the predicted, average predicted,
actual and average actual values of the compressional or shear
wave velocity respectively with the data ranging from 1 to m.
Pm   
Fig. 4a. Sensitivity analysis of the compressional wave velocity and its dependence on i¼1 xi  x yi  y
R ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi q ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi (6)
selected features. Pm  2 Pm  2
i¼1 xi  x * i¼1 yi  y

Pearson rank correlation coefficient has a value that ranges

between 0 and ± 1. A value close to zero represents lack of rela-
tionship between the two variables while a value other than zero
depicts the existence of a certain level of relationship. At values
close to þ1 or 1, there exist a strong positive or negative rela-
tionship between the two parameters. Fig. 4a shows the existence
of a strong correlation between Vp and features such as measured
depth (MD), gamma-ray (GR), density log (RHOB), and neutron
porosity (NPHI). In addition, the figure shows the existence of a
low-level dependence between all the resistivity logs, caliper log,
and Vp. Similarly, Fig. 4b shows a closely related dependence of the
Vs on features such as Vp, MD, GR, RHOB, NPHI and medium level
resistivity (RES-MED).
From this analysis, we observed that each of the selected pa-
rameters has a different level of sensitivity on the target, i.e. Vp and
Vs. Despite having both low and high hitters among the available
Fig. 4b. Sensitivity analysis of the shear wave velocity and its dependence on selected input parameters, we tried different combinations of the available
features.
parameters (i.e. MD, GR, RHOB, NPHI, RES-SHT, RES-MED, RES-DEP,

Table 2A
Accuracy of compressional wave velocity model with different combinations of features and associated RMSE values.

Number of Inputs Selected features R2 RMSE

1 NPHI 0.8470 0.2023

2 NPHI, GR 0.8518 0.1992
3 NPHI, GR, RHOB 0.8662 0.1893
4 NPHI, GR, RHOB, MD 0.8682 0.1879
5 NPHI, GR, RHOB, MD, RES-MED 0.8682 0.1879
6 NPHI, GR, RHOB, MD, RES-MED, CAL 0.8709 0.1860
7 NPHI, GR, RHOB, MD, RES-MED, CAL, RES-DEP 0.8715 0.1855
8 NPHI, GR, RHOB, MD, RES-MED, CAL, RES-DEP, RES-SHT 0.8715 0.1856

202
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208

Table 2B
Accuracy of shear wave velocity models with different combinations of features and associated RMSE values.

Number of Inputs Selected features R2 RMSE

1 Vp 0.8700 0.1179
2 Vp, NPHI 0.8702 0.1179
3 Vp, NPHI, GR 0.8709 0.1175
4 Vp, NPHI, GR, RHOB 0.8827 0.1121
5 Vp, NPHI, GR, RHOB, MD 0.9276 0.0880
6 Vp, NPHI, GR, RHOB, MD, CAL 0.9285 0.0875
7 Vp, NPHI, GR, RHOB, CAL, MD, RES-MED 0.9285 0.0875
8 Vp, NPHI, GR, RHOB, CAL, MD, RES-MED, RES-DEP 0.9285 0.0875
9 Vp, NPHI, GR, RHOB, CAL, MD, RES-MED, RES-DEP, SHT 0.9285 0.0875

CAL) to select the combination with the best correlations to the
desired outputs, i.e. Vp and Vs. In carrying out this procedure, a
predictive analytic study (i.e. regression analysis that has found
wide range of applications in different fields of science and engi-
neering) was used to model and predict both the linear and non-
linear relationship between a dependent variable (target) and one
or more set of independent variables (features). In this study, we
considered a multiple linear regression model (Eq. (7)) to fit the
relationship between the predictor and the target. Here, we applied
the least mean square error (MSE) minimization method in order to
get the best set of fitting parameters (b0, b1, b2,…, bn) that gives the
best relationship between the ‘n’ number of features (x1, x2, x3,…,
xn) and target (y).
y ¼ b0 þ b1 x1 þ b2 x2 þ b3 x3 þ … þ bn xn
The effectiveness of the different combinations was evaluated
using the standard root mean squared error (RMSE) and correlation
coefficient (R2) as the statistical measures. Tables 2A and 2B give
the results of the analysis. From the tables, we observed that the
model with six (6) features (inputs) gives the best representation
for both Vp and Vs.
4. Performance of predictive model and comparison with
existing correlations
In this study, we considered the ANN, ANFIS, and LSSVM, in
addition to the existing regression models, to determine the rela-
tionship between the optimum set of features i.e. predictors and
the target. For the ANN model, we developed a neural network
consisting of three distinct layers. Here, the input layer consists of
input parameters, the hidden layer contains ten hidden neurons
responsible for correlating the predictor variables to the target and
the output layer. In training of the model, the Levenberg-Marquardt
(7)
algorithm was applied due to its widely acknowledged favorable
results. We trained different ANN models several times to obtain an
optimal ANN model with the highest possible precision. In this
study, the activation function for the hidden layer is tangent

Fig. 5. Statistical error analysis of the Vp prediction using different algorithms for train, test, validation and all data.

203
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208

Fig. 6. Statistical error analysis of the Vs prediction using different algorithms for train, test, validation and all data.

sigmoid, and that of output is log-sigmoid type. In developing the shown in Figs. 5 and 6 for ANN, ANFIS and LSSVM for various
ANFIS model, we considered the fuzzy logic of the Takagi-Sugeno datasets including training, testing and the whole dataset. Based on
model type. To implement the ANFIS, we applied the Subtractive the observations, some valuable points can be surmised from this
clustering method in determining the model clusters. In building table. To start with, there is no extensive contrast between the
the LSSVM model with high accuracy, we consider a SVM model training, testing and validation subsets for the three different data
with radial basis kernel function and tune the fitting parameters (s2 driven models. Consequently, the overtraining issues which may
& g) using the Coupled Simulated Annealing. have occurred during the model examination did not happen in the
As mentioned earlier, the available databank have approxi- present study. In addition, the results of the testing and validation
mately 6526 data points. In building the models, we devoted 5873 stages show high degree of accuracy and this serves as the basis for
data points in developing and assessing the different models and the application of the three models in accurately predicting both Vp
the remaining virgin data points were reserved for evaluating the
accuracy of the final model. Before the training of the different
models, the available sample data points have been normalized to a
value ranging between 1 and 1 to obtain a uniform domain and Table 3
prevent the data scattering. Besides, we divided the entire dataset Statistical error analysis of Vp empirical correlations and the proposed models.
into three distinct categories namely Training, Testing, and Vali- Model R2 RMSE
dation in the proportion of 80%, 10% and 10% respectively. In pre-
ANN 0.96325 0.133287
diction, it is always recommended to execute the developed model
ANFIS 0.97123 0.122634
repeatedly in order to achieve the global optimum value. In this LSSVM 0.97056 0.089263
study, the proposed ANN model was executed repeatedly with
different number of neurons and an ANN model with 10 hidden
neurons was considered the best. Similarly, the developed ANFIS Table 4
model has an optimal clustering radius of 0.3. The LSSVM model Statistical error analysis of Vs empirical correlations and the proposed models.
utilized in this study undergone a similar iterative process and the
Model R2 RMSE
resulting values of the LSSVM tuning parameters in the form (s2, g)
are given as 0.2497, 24.9259 and 0.6411, 105.7253 for the Vp and Vs ANN 0.985139 0.057253
ANFIS 0.98297 0.061291
respectively. To understand the accuracy of all the proposed
LSSVM 0.99054 0.045741
models, two different statistical parameters (RMSE and R-Squared, Pickett (1963) 0.861906 0.174152
R2) were selected. The mathematical equation for these parameters Carroll (1969) 0.86166 1.771853
is given by Eqs (5) and (6) respectively. Chopra et al. (2014) 0.855802 0.146793
Eskandari et al. (2003) 0.841978 0.15862
At the start, we applied the different models with the aim of
Brocher (2005) 0.856229 0.178621
obtaining the best representation of the relationship between the Oloruntobi et al. (2019) [a] 0.879591 0.117298
selected features and target. The results of this investigation are Oloruntobi et al. (2019) [b] 0.863851 0.154523

204
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade
Fig. 7. Predicted values of the compressional wave velocity from three different
intelligent models are shown along with the actual compressional wave velocity in (a)
ANN (b) ANFIS and (c) LSSVM, respectively.
and Vs. Furthermore, looking at the two statistical parameters for
all the proposed techniques, LSSVM gives the least error and this
affirms its position as one with the best representation of the
relationship between Vp and the selected inputs. Similarly, the
LSSVM model demonstrated a close level accuracy in the estima-
tion of the Vs for the data points under consideration. The LSSVM
method predicts Vp with an accuracy of R2 ¼ 0.98527 and
RMSE ¼ 0.088911 and the Vs with a high performance of
R2 ¼ 0.99316 and RMSE ¼ 0.038102. The accuracy of the developed
models based on the 5873 studied data points has an order of the
form:
LSSVM > ANFIS > ANN > REG
In attempts to show the superiority of the new models in pre-
dicting both Vp and Vs, the proposed models are contrasted with
known empirical correlations and regression models as shown in
Tables 3 and 4.
205
Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208
Fig. 8. Predicted values of the shear wave velocity from three different intelligent
models are shown along with the actual shear wave velocity in (a) ANN (b) ANFIS and
(c) LSSVM, respectively.
Based on the result of the statistical analysis, all the newly
developed intelligent models show better accuracy in terms of the
R2 and RMSE when compared with the mathematical correlations.
With the exception of the new correlations developed by Olor-
untobi et al. [15], most empirical correlations shows poor per-
formance in estimating the desired target. In addition, among the
contemplated connections, the degree of accuracy when
compared with the actual target are approximately same. As ex-
pected, the proposed intelligent systems have less RMSE values
and high R2 which suggests that estimation of deviation between
the predicted and target by the models are profoundly focused
around the line of best fit as shown in Figs. 7 and 8. In addition,
based on the statistical parameters (RMSE), the LSSVM and Carroll
[17] are, individually, the most and the least exact strategies for
assessing Vs and LSSVM and ANN models are in the same prefer-
ence for the Vp.
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208

5. Conclusions Appendix B. Testing the developed model

In this study, the application of three different data-driven
models including ANN, ANFIS and LSSVM models to predict Vp
and Vs are investigated. The data obtained from the Volve field in
the Norwegian North Sea were used in the development of these
models. Based on the preliminary analysis, both Vp and Vs are
correlated to conventional wireline log parameters such as
measured depth, GR, RHOB, NPHI and resistivity log. The results
obtained with the intelligent systems were compared with existing
empirical correlations and regression equations. Based on the re-
sults, the output of the LSSVM model (highest R2, smallest RMSE)
outperforms the ANN and ANFIS models in estimating the shear
wave and compressional wave velocities. Unlike the three intelli-
gent models, mathematical equations show poor predictive ability
when applied to the studied data. The output from the three
intelligent systems confirms the superiority of the data driven
approach at all ranges of data. The LSSVM model is the most ac-
curate method to estimate these parameters without consideration
for the geological settings and depositional environments type and
notably, this is expected to be critical in operations such as drilling
and seismic.
Additional information
In this section, we presented the various developed models and
additional model results for public usage and further development.
All necessary files are available via the link:
https://github.com/EnthusiasticTeslim/Geomechanical_
prediciton.
Declaration of competing interests
This study applies three different algorithms namely ANN,
ANFIS and LSSVM. To apply these models, it is expected to have a
working version of MATLAB [93] installed on the available
computer.
After loading the available files into the working directory using
appropriate MATLAB built command, there is need to transform the
new dataset (features only, no target) to value ranging between 1
and 1. To achieve this, the following approach should be imple-
mented. Assuming, we have a feature vector called model_feature.
feature ¼ mapminmax(‘apply’, model_feature, scalInpt);
A. ANN
To implement the ANN model, the following code is
implemented.
For Vp,
output ¼ ann_model_vp_deploy (‘apply’, model_feature, scalInpt);
For Vs,
output ¼ ann_model_vs_deploy (‘apply’, model_feature, scalInpt);
B. ANFIS
To implement the ANFIS model, the following code is imple-
mented for predicting both the Vp and Vs

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests. output ¼ evalfis(model_feature, fis);

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the academic support
received from College of Petroleum Engineering and Geosciences at
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Mineral Resources (KFUPM),
Saudi Arabia.
Appendix A. Empirical correlation and Regression Equations
C. LSSVM
To implement the LSSVM model, the following code lines are
implemented in the MATLAB environment.
output ¼ simlssvm({[Train_in],[Train_out],type,gam,sig2,
’RBF_kernel’,’preprocess’},{alpha,b}, model_feature)

In the section, we presented the empirical and regression-based

models used in predicting the studied geomechanical properties. Appendix C. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at

Table A https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2020.07.008.
Common empirical and regression models for Vs estimation

Model Equation
Nomenclature
Pickett (1963) Vp
Vs ¼
1:9
Carroll (1969) Vs ¼ 1:09913326  Vp0:9238115336 MD wireline log measured depth
Castagna et al. Vs ¼  0:05509  Vp2 þ 1:0168  Vp  1:0305 RHOB Density log
(2014) GR Gamma ray
Eskandari et al. Vs ¼ 0:1236  Vp2 þ 1:612  Vp  2:3057 NPHI Neutron porosity
(2003)
Brocher (2005) RES-SHT Shallow resistivity
Vs ¼ 0:7858  1:2344  Vp þ 0:7949  Vp2  0:1238  Vp3 þ
RES-MID Medium resistivity
0:0064  Vp4
Oloruntobi et al.  3  2 RES-DEP Deep resistivity
Vp Vp
(2019) Vs ¼ 0:291  pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  2:179  pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þ 6:562  Vp Compressional wave velocity
  RHOB RHOB
Vp Vs Shear wave velocity
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  5:146
RHOB ANN Artifical Neural Network
Vs ¼ 0:062  ½Vp3  0:744  ½Vp2 þ 3:635  ½Vp  4:305 ANFIS Adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system
LSSVM Least Square Support Vector Machine
206
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208

References [31] Z. Hossain, T. Mukerji, I.L. Fabricius, Vp-Vs relationship and amplitude varia-
tion with offset modelling of glauconitic greensandz, Geophys. Prospect. 60
(2012) 117e137, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.00968.x.
[1] G.R. Pickett, Acoustic character logs and their applications in formation
[32] B.H. Russell, D.P. Hampson, L.R. Lines, A case study in the local estimation of
evaluation, J. Petrol. Technol. 15 (1963) 659e667, https://doi.org/10.2118/
shear-wave logs, in: SEG Tech. Progr. Expand. Abstr. 2004, Society of Explo-
452-PA.
ration Geophysicists, 2004, pp. 390e393, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1851278.
[2] M.R. Rezaee, A. Kadkhodaie Ilkhchi, A. Barabadi, Prediction of shear wave
[33] T. Olayiwola, Application of artificial neural network to estimate permeability
velocity from petrophysical data utilizing intelligent systems: an example
from nuclear magnetic resonance log, in: SPE Annu. Tech. Conf. Exhib., 2017,
from a sandstone reservoir of Carnarvon Basin, Australia, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 55
https://doi.org/10.2118/189294-STU.
(2007) 201e212, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2006.08.008.
[34] A.K. Verma, B.A. Cheadle, A. Routray, W.K. Mohanty, L. Mansinha, Porosity and
[3] C.C. Potter, S.L.M. Miller, G.F. Margrave, Formation elastic parameters and
permeability estimation using neural network approach from well log data,
synthetic P-P and P-S seismograms for the Blackfoot field. https://www.
search discov, 41276, http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/documents/2014/
crewes.org/ForOurSponsors/ResearchReports/1996/1996-37.pdf, 1996.
41276verma/ndx_verma, 2014. (Accessed 5 September 2019).
(Accessed 5 September 2019).
[35] S. Singh, A.I. Kanli, S. Sevgen, A general approach for porosity estimation using
[4] R. Singh, A. Kainthola, T.N. Singh, Estimation of elastic constant of rocks using
artificial neural network method: a case study from Kansas gas field, Studia
an ANFIS approach, Appl. Soft Comput. 12 (2012) 40e45, https://doi.org/
Geophys. Geod. 60 (2016) 130e140, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11200-015-
10.1016/J.ASOC.2011.09.010.
0820-2.
[5] C. Chang, M.D. Zoback, A. Khaksar, Empirical relations between rock strength
[36] S. Zaker, S. mohamadi nafchi, M. Rastegarnia, S. Bagheri, A. Sanati, A. Naghibi,
and physical properties in sedimentary rocks, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 51 (2006)
Prediction of new perforation intervals in a depleted reservoir to achieve the
223e237, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PETROL.2006.01.003.
maximum productivity: a case study of PNN logging in a cased-well of an
[6] M. Rajabi, B. Bohloli, E. Gholampour Ahangar, Intelligent approaches for
Iranian oil reservoir, Petroleum (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/
prediction of compressional, shear and Stoneley wave velocities from con-
J.PETLM.2019.06.003.
ventional well log data: a case study from the Sarvak carbonate reservoir in
[37] A. Ansari, M. Heras, J. Nones, M. Mohammadpoor, F. Torabi, Predicting the
the Abadan Plain (Southwestern Iran), Comput. Geosci. 36 (2010) 647e664,
performance of steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) method utilizing
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2009.09.008.
artificial neural network (ANN), Petroleum (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/
[7] M. Zoback, Reservoir geomechanics. https://books.google.com/books?
J.PETLM.2019.04.001.
hl¼en&lr¼&id¼Xx63OaM2JIIC&oi¼fnd&pg¼PR7&
[38] A. Hashemi Fath, F. Madanifar, M. Abbasi, Implementation of multilayer per-
ots¼ytmgIU08GY&sig¼-y7iqzLA-rMg8hWo6TIGCjwFjA0, 2010.
ceptron (MLP) and radial basis function (RBF) neural networks to predict
(Accessed 6 September 2019).
solution gas-oil ratio of crude oil systems, Petroleum (2018), https://doi.org/
[8] A.R. Najibi, M.R. Asef, Prediction of seismic-wave velocities in rock at various
10.1016/J.PETLM.2018.12.002.
confining pressures based on unconfined data, Geophysics 79 (2014)
[39] O.A. Sanuade, P. Adetokunbo, M.A. Oladunjoye, A.A. Olaojo, Predicting mois-
D235eD242, https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2013-0349.1.
ture content of soil from thermal properties using artificial neural network,
[9] M.S. Ameen, B.G.D. Smart, J.M. Somerville, S. Hammilton, N.A. Naji, Predicting
Arab. J. Geosci. 11 (2018) 566, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-3917-4.
rock mechanical properties of carbonates from wireline logs (A case study:
[40] G. Çakmak, C. Yıldız, The prediction of seedy grape drying rate using a neural
Arab-D reservoir, Ghawar field, Saudi Arabia), Mar. Petrol. Geol. 26 (2009)
network method, Comput. Electron. Agric. 75 (2011) 132e138, https://
430e444, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2009.01.017.
doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPAG.2010.10.008.
[10] W. Ouyang, Comprehensive analysis method for transient pressure and pro-
[41] H. Çanakcı, A. Baykasog
lu, H. Güllü, Prediction of compressive and tensile
duction of multistage fractured horizontal well in tight gas reservoirs, Well
strength of Gaziantep basalts via neural networks and gene expression pro-
Test. 27 (2018) 14e21, https://doi.org/10.19680/j.cnki.1004-
gramming, Neural Comput. Appl. 18 (2009) 1031e1041, https://doi.org/
4388.2018.01.003.
10.1007/s00521-008-0208-0.
[11] G.M. Hamada, Reservoir fluids identification using vp/vs ratio? Oil Gas Sci.
[42] M.A. Ahmadi, S.R. Shadizadeh, K. Shah, A. Bahadori, An accurate model to
Technol. 59 (2004) 649e654, https://doi.org/10.2516/ogst:2004046.
predict drilling fluid density at wellbore conditions, Egypt, J. Petrol. 27 (2018)
[12] I. Tsvankin, Reflection moveout and parameter estimation for horizontal
1e10, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJPE.2016.12.002.
transverse isotropy, Geophysics 62 (1997) 614e629, https://doi.org/10.1190/
[43] I. Aizenberg, L. Sheremetov, L. Villa-Vargas, J. Martinez-Mun ~ oz, Multilayer
1.1444170.
Neural Network with Multi-Valued Neurons in time series forecasting of oil
[13] Y. Zheng, G. Larson, Seismic fracture detection: ambiguity and practical so-
production, Neurocomputing 175 (2016) 980e989, https://doi.org/10.1016/
lution, in: SEG Int’l Expo. 74th Annu. Meet., Denver, Colorado, 2004. http://
J.NEUCOM.2015.06.092.
library.seg.org/. (Accessed 6 September 2019).
[44] S.O. Olatunji, A. Selamat, A.R.A. Azeez, Harnessing the power of type-2 fuzzy
[14] J.R. Granli, B. Arntsen, A. Sollid, E. Hilde, Imaging through gas-filled sediments
logic system to achieve improved permeability prediction accuracy in a
using marine shear-wave data, Geophysics 64 (1999) 668e677, https://
hybrid setting, in: SPE Kingdom Saudi Arab. Annu. Tech. Symp. Exhib., Society
doi.org/10.1190/1.1444576.
of Petroleum Engineers, 2016, https://doi.org/10.2118/182745-MS.
[15] O. Oloruntobi, D. Onalo, S. Adedigba, L. James, R. Chunduru, S. Butt, Data-
[45] F.A. Anifowose, A. Abdulraheem, A functional networks-type-2 fuzzy logic
driven shear wave velocity prediction model for siliciclastic rocks, J. Petrol.
hybrid model for the prediction of porosity and permeability of oil and gas
Sci. Eng. (2019) 106293, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.106293.
reservoirs, in: 2010 Second Int. Conf. Comput. Intell. Model. Simul., IEEE, 2010,
[16] D. Wantland, G. Laroque, M. Bollo, D. Dickey, Geophysical measurements of
pp. 193e198, https://doi.org/10.1109/CIMSiM.2010.43.
rock properties in situ, in: Proc INTL CONF, 1964. https://trid.trb.org/view/
[46] A. Bhatt, H.B. Helle, Committee neural networks for porosity and permeability
119270. (Accessed 8 September 2019).
prediction from well logs, Geophys. Prospect. 50 (2002) 645e660, https://
[17] R.D. Carroll, The determination of the acoustic parameters of volcanic rocks
doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2478.2002.00346.x.
from compressional velocity measurements, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci.
[47] A. Kamari, F. Moeini, M.-J. Shamsoddini-Moghadam, S.-A. Hosseini,
Geomech. Abstr. 6 (1969) 557e579, https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(69)
A.H. Mohammadi, A. Hemmati-Sarapardeh, Modeling the permeability of
90022-9.
heterogeneous oil reservoirs using a robust method, Geosci. J. 20 (2016)
[24] S. Ji, Q. Wang, B. Xia, Handbook of Seismic Properties of Minerals, Rocks and
259e271, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12303-015-0033-2.
Ores, Polytechnique International Press, 2002.
[48] H. Eskandari, M.R. Rezaee, M. Mohammadnia, Application of multiple
[25] M.L. Greenberg, J.P. Castagna, SHEAR-WAVE velocity estimation IN porous
regression and artificial neural network techniques…, CSEG Rec. (2004)
rocks: theoretical formulation, preliminary verification and applications,
41e48. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8297/
Geophys. Prospect. 40 (1992) 195e209, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
e5cbc916763d97fa59251e4a3ebe087b8e92.pdf. (Accessed 5 September
2478.1992.tb00371.x.
2019).
[26] S. Chopra, J.P. Castagna, J.P. Castagna, F. Al-Jarrah, S. Chopra, 2. Rock-physics
[49] M.R. Rezaee, A. Kadkhodaie Ilkhchi, A. Barabadi, Prediction of shear wave
foundation for AVO analysis, in: AVO, Society of Exploration Geophysicists,
velocity from petrophysical data utilizing intelligent systems: an example
2014, pp. 15e33, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560803201.ch2.
from a sandstone reservoir of Carnarvon Basin, Australia, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 55
[27] H. Eskandari, M. Rezaee, Shear wave velocity estimation utilizing wireline logs
(2007) 201e212, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PETROL.2006.08.008.
for a carbonate reservoir, South-West Iran, Iran, Int. J. 4 (2003) 209e221,
[50] M. Zoveidavianpoor, A. Samsuri, S.R. Shadizadeh, Adaptive neuro fuzzy
2003, http://journals.ut.ac.ir/pdf_30964_
inference system for compressional wave velocity prediction in a carbonate
cbea006511f82abf766fcac8b052637f.html. (Accessed 27 August 2019).
reservoir, J. Appl. Geophys. 89 (2013) 96e107, https://doi.org/10.1016/
[28] T.M. Brocher, Empirical relations between elastic wavespeeds and density in
j.jappgeo.2012.11.010.
the earth’s crust, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95 (2005) 2081e2092, https://doi.org/
[51] M. Asoodeh, P. Bagheripour, Prediction of compressional, shear, and Stoneley
10.1785/0120050077.
wave velocities from conventional well log data using a committee machine
[29] S. Miller, R. Stewart, Effects of lithology, porosity and shaliness on P and
with intelligent systems, Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 45 (2012) 45e63, https://
swave velocities from SONIC logs, Can. J. Explor. Geophys. Explor. Geophys. 26
doi.org/10.1007/s00603-011-0181-2.
(1990) 94e103. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cf5f/
[52] A. Nourafkan, A. Kadkhodaie-Ilkhchi, Shear wave velocity estimation from
48c47c424604661956bc097b807aeb6c4fc5.pdf?_ga¼2.70186969.83368465.
conventional well log data by using a hybrid ant colony-fuzzy inference
1567713278-1147726868.1566939668. (Accessed 5 September 2019).
system: a case study from Cheshmeh-Khosh oilfield, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 127
[30] A. Jorstad, T. Mukerji, G. Mavko, Model-based shear-wave velocity estimation
(2015) 459e468, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2015.02.001.
versus empirical regressions, Geophys. Prospect. 47 (1999) 785e797, https://
[53] F.A. Hadi, R. Nygaard, Shear wave prediction in carbonate reservoirs: can
doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2478.1999.00154.x.
artificial neural network outperform regression analysis?, in: 52nd US Rock

207
T. Olayiwola and O.A. Sanuade
Mech./Geomech. Symp. American Rock Mechanics Association, Seattle,
Washington, USA, 2018. https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/ARMA-
2018-905. (Accessed 6 September 2019).
[54] M. Anemangely, A. Ramezanzadeh, H. Amiri, S.A. Hoseinpour, Machine
learning technique for the prediction of shear wave velocity using petro-
physical logs, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 174 (2019) 306e327, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.petrol.2018.11.032.
[55] Equinor, Volve Data. https://data.equinor.com/dataset/Volve, 2018.
[56] S. Dutta, J.P. Gupta, PVT correlations for Indian crude using artificial neural
networks, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 72 (2010) 93e109, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.petrol.2010.03.007.
[57] S.R. Moosavi, B. Vaferi, D.A. Wood, Applying orthogonal collocation for rapid
and reliable solutions of transient flow in naturally fractured reservoirs,
J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 162 (2018) 166e179, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.petrol.2017.12.039.
[58] R. Zabihi, D. Mowla, H.R. Karami, Artificial intelligence approach to predict
drag reduction in crude oil pipelines, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 178 (2019) 586e593,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.03.042.
[59] J. Moghadasi, K. Kazemi, S. Moradi, The application of artificial neural net-
works in determination of bubble point pressure for iranian crude oils, Petrol.
Sci. Technol. 31 (2013) 2475e2482, https://doi.org/10.1080/
10916466.2011.572107.
[60] J.J. Hopfield, Neurons with graded response have collective computational
properties like those of two-state neurons, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 81
(1984) 3088e3092, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.81.10.3088.
[61] M.A. Ahmadi, Developing a robust surrogate model of chemical flooding based
on the artificial neural network for enhanced oil recovery implications, Math.
Probl Eng. 2015 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/706897.
[62] M.A. Ahmadi, Prediction of asphaltene precipitation using artificial neural
network optimized by imperialist competitive algorithm, J. Pet. Explor. Prod.
Technol. 1 (2011) 99e106, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202-011-0013-7.
[63] M.A. Ahmadi, S.R. Shadizadeh, New approach for prediction of asphaltene
precipitation due to natural depletion by using evolutionary algorithm
concept, Fuel 102 (2012) 716e723, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.05.050.
[64] E. Jorjani, S. Chehreh Chelgani, S. Mesroghli, Application of artificial neural
networks to predict chemical desulfurization of Tabas coal, Fuel 87 (2008)
2727e2734, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2008.01.029.
[65] J.R. Jang, ANFIS : adaptive-Network-based fuzzy inference system, IEEE Trans.
Syst. Man Cybern. 23 (1993) 665e685.
[66] A.K. Lohani, N.K. Goel, K.K.S. Bhatia, Takagi-Sugeno fuzzy inference system for
modeling stage-discharge relationship, J. Hydrol. 331 (2006) 146e160,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.05.007.
[67] L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Inf. Control 8 (1965) 338e353, https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0019-9958(65)90241-X.
[68] T. Takagi, M. Sugeno, Fuzzy identification of systems and its applications to
modeling and control, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. SMC-15 (1985) 116e132,
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1985.6313399.
[69] S.Y. Yi, M.J. Chung, Identification of fuzzy relational model and its application
to control, Fuzzy Set Syst. 59 (1993) 25e33, https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-
0114(93)90222-4.
[70] E.H. Mamdani, Application of fuzzy logic to approximate reasoning using
linguistic synthesis, IEEE Trans. Comput. Ce26 (1977) 1182e1191, https://
doi.org/10.1109/TC.1977.1674779.
[71] S.A. Ghallab, N. Badr, M. Hashem, A.B. Salem, M.F. Tolba, Modeling an appli-
cation for oil and gas ratio prediction using ANFIS, Egypt, Comput. Sci. J. 36
(2012) 1e10.
[72] D. Karabog
a, E. Kaya, Training ANFIS by using the artificial bee colony algo-
rithm, Turk. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 25 (2017) 1669e1679, https://doi.org/
10.3906/elk-1601-240.
[73] H.A. Zamani, S. Rafiee-Taghanaki, M. Karimi, M. Arabloo, A. Dadashi,
208
Petroleum 7 (2021) 199e208
Implementing ANFIS for prediction of reservoir oil solution gas-oil ratio, J. Nat.
Gas Sci. Eng. 25 (2015) 325e334, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2015.04.008.
[74] H. Rezaei, M. Rahmati, H. Modarress, Application of ANFIS and MLR models for
prediction of methane adsorption on X and Y faujasite zeolites: effect of
cations substitution, Neural Comput. Appl. 28 (2017) 301e312, https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-2057-y.
[75] M. Najib, M. Salleh, K. Hussain, A review of training methods of ANFIS for
applications in business and economics, Int. J. Univ. Tun Hussein Serv. Sci.
Technol. 9 (2016) 165e172.
[76] Y. Gershteyn, L. Perman, Matlab : ANFIS Toolbox what Is ANFIS ?, 2003.
[77] ~o, H.M.I. Pousinho, V.M.F. Mendes, Hybrid wavelet-PSO-ANFIS
J.P.S. Catala
approach for short-term wind power forecasting in Portugal, IEEE Trans.
Sustain. Energy 2 (2011) 50e59, https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2010.2076359.
[78] C. Cortes, V. Vapnik, Support-vector networks, Mach. Learn. 20 (1995)
273e297, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994018.
[79] J.A.K. Suykens, J. Vandewalle, Least squares support vector machine classifiers,
Neural Process. Lett. 9 (1999) 293e300, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:
1018628609742.
[80] A.J. Smola, B.S.C.H. Scholkopf, A tutorial on support vector regression, Stat.
Comput. 14 (2004) 199e222. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023%
2FB%3ASTCO.0000035301.49549.88.pdf. (Accessed 23 August 2019).
[81] K. Pelckmans, J.A.K. Suykens, T. Van Gestel, J. De Brabanter, L. Lukas,
B. Hamers, B. De Moor, J. Vandewalle, LS-SVMlab: a Matlab/C Toolbox for Least
Squares Support Vector Machines, vol. 142, Tutor. KULeuven-ESAT Leuven,
Belgium, 2002 citeulike-article-id:6858102.
[82] J.A.K. Suykens, T. Van Gestel, J. Vandewalle, B. De Moor, A support vector
machine formulation to PCA analysis and its kernel version, IEEE Trans. Neural
Network. 14 (2003) 447e450, https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2003.809414.
[83] A. Shokrollahi, M. Arabloo, F. Gharagheizi, A.H. Mohammadi, Intelligent model
for prediction of CO2 - reservoir oil minimum miscibility pressure, Fuel 112
(2013) 375e384, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.04.036.
[84] S. Esmaeili, H. Sarma, T. Harding, B. Maini, A data-driven model for predicting
the effect of temperature on oil-water relative permeability, Fuel 236 (2019)
264e277, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.08.109.
[86] M.A. Ahmadi, B. Mahmoudi, A. Yazdanpanah, Development of robust model to
estimate gas-oil interfacial tension using least square support vector machine:
experimental and modeling study, J. Supercrit. Fluids 107 (2016) 122e128,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.supflu.2015.08.012.
[87] M.A. Ahmadi, A. Bahadori, A LSSVM approach for determining well placement
and conning phenomena in horizontal wells, Fuel 153 (2015) 276e283,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.02.094.
[88] M.A. Ahmadi, Toward reliable model for prediction Drilling Fluid Density at
wellbore conditions: a LSSVM model, Neurocomputing 211 (2016) 143e149,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2016.01.106.
[89] M.A. Ahmadi, Connectionist approach estimates gas-oil relative permeability
in petroleum reservoirs: application to reservoir simulation, Fuel 140 (2015)
429e439, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.09.058.
[90] M.A. Ahmadi, M. Ebadi, P.S. Marghmaleki, M.M. Fouladi, Evolving predictive
model to determine condensate-to-gas ratio in retrograded condensate gas
reservoirs, Fuel 124 (2014) 241e257, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.fuel.2014.01.073.
[91] O. Oloruntobi, S. Butt, The new formation bulk density predictions for silici-
clastic rocks, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 180 (2019) 526e537, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.petrol.2019.05.017.
[92] M. Anemangely, A. Ramezanzadeh, B. Tokhmechi, Shear wave travel time
estimation from petrophysical logs using ANFIS-PSO algorithm: a case study
from Ab-Teymour Oilfield, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 38 (2017) 373e387, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2017.01.003.
[93] Matlab, MATLAB, (2016). (mathworks.com/patents).