Explainable artificial intelligence for oil and gas reservoir porosity prediction

Paihereye AIMAITI, Ji ZHANG, YuanFeng CHENG, Yaxiaer YALIKUN, Yilihamujiang TUNIYAZE, Amina WUMAIER, GuiPing LIU

Prog Geophy ›› 2026, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (4) : 1797-1809.

PDF(1482 KB)
Home Journals Progress in Geophysics
Progress in Geophysics

Abbreviation (ISO4): Prog Geophy      Editor in chief:

About  /  Aim & scope  /  Editorial board  /  Indexed  /  Contact  / 
PDF(1482 KB)
Prog Geophy ›› 2026, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (4) : 1797-1809. DOI: 10.6038/pg2026JJ0326

Explainable artificial intelligence for oil and gas reservoir porosity prediction

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Accurate porosity prediction in oil and gas reservoirs is crucial for reservoir characterization. However, traditional methods like core measurements and logging data are expensive, inefficient, and fail to fully capture large-scale 3D porosity distributions. To address the limitations of petrophysical models with specific assumptions, this paper introduces an Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) approach that combines machine learning algorithms, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis, and petrophysical theory. Using the F3 Block in the European North Sea Basin as a case study, we built 3D porosity prediction models with four mainstream algorithms—multilayer perceptron (MLP), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Regression (SVR), and Linear Regression (LR)—using various 3D seismic attributes as inputs. SHAP values were employed to uncover the decision-making logic behind the predictions. All four algorithms achieved high accuracy, with support vector regression performing best (R2=0.9669, RMSE=0.0055), surpassing traditional linear regression. The seismic inversion acoustic impedance, given its clear petrophysical meaning, was the most influential input feature across all algorithms. Low-pass filtering of logging curves further improved prediction accuracy. This study proposes an efficient, reliable XAI method for porosity prediction by integrating machine learning, petrophysical theory, and SHAP analysis. This approach enhances model interpretability and transparency in reservoir characterization, ensuring results are petrophysically sound.

Key words

Oil and gas reservoir porosity prediction / Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) / 3D seismic attributes / SHapley Additive ExPlanations (SHAP)

Cite this article

Download Citations
Paihereye AIMAITI , Ji ZHANG , YuanFeng CHENG , et al . Explainable artificial intelligence for oil and gas reservoir porosity prediction[J]. Progress in Geophysics. 2026, 41(4): 1797-1809 https://doi.org/10.6038/pg2026JJ0326

References

Ahmed O A , Abdel-Aal R E , Almustafa H . Reservoir property prediction using abductive networks. Geophysics, 2010, 75 (1):
An P , Cao D P . Research and application of logging lithology identification based on deep learning. Progress in Geophysics, 2018, 33 (3): 1029- 1034.
Bacon M, Simm R, Redshaw T. 2013.3-D Seismic Interpretation (in Chinese). Cheng Y F, Wang Y G Trans. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press.
Breiman L . Random forests. Machine Learning, 2001, 45: 5- 32.
Buland A , Omre H . Bayesian linearized AVO inversion. Geophysics, 2003, 68 (1): 185- 198.
Clausen O R , Korstgåd J A . Small-scale faulting as an indicator of deformation mechanism in the tertiary sediments of the northern Danish Central Trough. Journal of Structural Geology, 1993, 15 (11): 1343- 1357.
Clausen O R , Nielsen O B , Huuse M , et al. Geological indications for Palaeogene uplift in the eastern North Sea Basin. Global and Planetary Change, 2000, 24 (3-4): 175- 187.
Connolly P . Elastic impedance. The Leading Edge, 1999, 18 (4): 438- 452.
Cortes C , Vapnik V . Support-vector networks. Machine Learning, 1995, 20 (3): 273- 297.
dGB. [2024-06-26]. F3 demo dataset. https://terranubis.com/datainfo/F3-Demo-2020.
Fjaer E, Holt R M, Horsrud P, et al. 2008. Petroleum Related Rock Mechanics. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Gao F , Qu Z P , Wei Z , et al. Study on well-log lithofacies classification based on machine learning methods. Progress in Geophysics, 2024, 39 (3): 1173- 1192.
Groβ J. 2012. Linear Regression. Springer Science & Business Media.
Guo Y X , Li J , Qin D W , et al. Shearing wave velocity prediction by deep learning for coal-rich sand and mud interbedded formations in the Xihu Sag of the East China Sea. Progress in Geophysics, 2025, 40 (5): 2148- 2159.
Gupta H K. 2011. Encyclopedia of Solid Earth Geophysics. Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series. Dordrecht: Springer, doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-8702-7.
Hall A M , Gilg H A , Fallick A E , et al. Kaolins in gravels and saprolites in north-east Scotland: Evidence from stable H and O isotopes for Palaeocene-Miocene deep weathering. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 2015, 424: 6- 16.
Han H W , Cheng Y F , Zhang Y Y , et al. Review of seismic prediction of reservoir geophysical properties. Progress in Geophysics, 2021, 36 (2): 595- 610.
Hao Y J , Yang D H , Cheng Y F . Reservoir parameter inversion of CO2 geological sequestration based on the self-adaptive hybrid genetic algorithm. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2016, 59 (11): 4234- 4245.
Iturrarán-Viveros U , Parra J O . Artificial neural networks applied to estimate permeability, porosity and intrinsic attenuation using seismic attributes and well-log data. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 2014, 107: 45- 54.
Kay C. 1993. The growth and gross morphology of Quaternary deltas in the southern North Sea[D]. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.
Kesel R H , Gemmell A M D . The 'Pliocene' gravels of Buchan: a reappraisal. Scottish Journal of Geology, 1981, 17 (3): 185- 203.
Knott C G . Ⅲ. Reflexion and refraction of elastic waves, with seismological applications. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 1899, 48 (290): 64- 97.
Leiphart D J , Hart B S . Comparison of linear regression and a probabilistic neural network to predict porosity from 3-D seismic attributes in lower brushy canyon channeled sandstones, southeast New Mexico. Geophysics, 2001, 66 (5): 1349- 1358.
Leisi A , Saberi M R . Petrophysical parameters estimation of a reservoir using integration of wells and seismic data: a sandstone case study. Earth Science Informatics, 2023, 16 (1): 637- 652.
Li S G , Wei Z , Yang Y Q , et al. Petrophysical prediction of oil reservoirs using explainable artificial intelligence. Geophysics, 2025, 90 (4): M123- M133.
Lin N T , Zhang D , Zhang K , et al. Predicting distribution of hydrocarbon reservoirs with seismic data based on learning of the small-sample convolution neural network. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2018, 61 (10): 4110- 4125.
Lindseth R O . Synthetic sonic logs; a process for stratigraphic interpretation. Geophysics, 1979, 44 (1): 3- 26.
Lundberg S M, Lee S I. 2017. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. //Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. Long Beach, CA, USA: Curran Associates Inc., 4768-4777.
Mavko G , Mukerji T , Dvorkin J . The Rock Physics Handbook: Tools for Seismic Analysis of Porous Media. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998
NLOG. [2024-12-20]. NLOG data center. https://www.nlog.nl/datacenter/?lang=en.
Pearl J, Mackenzie D. 2018. The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect. New York: Basic Books.
Quiñonero-Candela J , Sugiyama M , Schwaighofer A , et al. Dataset Shift in Machine Learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2009
Reshef D N , Reshef Y A , Finucane H K , et al. Detecting novel associations in large data sets. Science, 2011, 334 (6062): 1518- 1524.
Rudin C . Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nature Machine Intelligence, 2019, 1 (5): 206- 215.
Rudin C . Why black box machine learning should be avoided for high-stakes decisions, in brief. Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 2022, 2 (1): 81
Rumelhart D E , Hinton G E , Williams R J . Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature, 1986, 323 (6088): 533- 536.
Runge J , Gerhardus A , Varando G , et al. Causal inference for time series. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 2023, 4 (7): 487- 505.
Schölkopf B , Locatello F , Bauer S , et al. Toward causal representation learning. Proceedings of the IEEE, 2021, 109 (5): 612- 634.
Schölkopf B. 2022. Causality for machine learning. //Probabilistic and Causal Inference: The Works of Judea Pearl. New York: ACM, 765-804, doi: 10.1145/3501714.3501755.
Selley R C, Sonnenberg S A. 2016. Elements of Petroleum Geology (in Chinese). Cheng Y F Trans. Dongying: China University of Petroleum Press.
Smith M. 2010. Rock property inversion for carbonate porosity in the Edwards reef complex. //SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2010. SEG, 368-372, doi: 10.1190/1.3513617.
Sørensen J C , Gregersen U , Breiner M , et al. High-frequency sequence stratigraphy of Upper Cenozoic deposits in the central and southeastern North Sea areas. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 1997, 14 (2): 99- 123.
Steeghs P , Overeem I , Tigrek S . Seismic volume attribute analysis of the Cenozoic succession in the L08 block (Southern North Sea). Global and Planetary Change, 2000, 27 (1-4): 245- 262.
Sun C Y , Yao Z A , Wu D S , et al. Prestack seismic inversion based on wave-equation. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2019, 62 (2): 604- 618.
Sun W T , Liu J W , Ba J , et al. Theoretical models of elastic wave dispersion-attenuation in porous medium. Progress in Geophysics, 2015, 30 (2): 586- 600.
Tiab D , Donaldson E C . Petrophysics: Theory and Practice of Measuring Reservoir Rock and Fluid Transport Properties. Oxford: Gulf Professional Publishing, 2015
Wang J Y , Wang Z G , Chen Y M , et al. Deep artificial neural network in seismic inversion. Progress in Geophysics, 2023, 38 (1): 298- 320.
Wyllie M R J , Gregory A R , Gardner L W . Elastic wave velocities in heterogeneous and porous media. Geophysics, 1956, 21 (1): 41- 70.
Yang W C . Methods and problems in seismic inversion of nonlinear wave equations. Progress in Geophysics, 1992, 7 (1): 9- 19.
Yin X Y , Zong Z Y , Wu G C . Research on seismic fluid identification driven by rock physics. Science China Earth Sciences, 2015, 58 (2): 159- 171.
Zhai X Y , Gao G , Liu H J , et al. Research on elastic parameter inversion method based on seismic facies-controlled deep learning network. Computers & Geosciences, 2024, 193: 105739
Zhang J , Liu G P , Wei Z , et al. Machine learning-based prediction of well logs guided by rock physics and its interpretation. Sensors, 2025, 25 (3): 836
Zoeppritz K . Ⅶb. über Reflexion und Durchgang seismischer Wellen durch Unstetigkeitsflächen. Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse, 1919, 1919: 66- 84.
阿伍赛斯, 穆科尔基, 梅维科. 2009. 定量地震解释. 李来林, 等译. 北京: 石油工业出版社.
, 丹平 . 基于深度学习的测井岩性识别方法研究与应用. 地球物理学进展, 2018, 33 (3): 1029- 1034.
, 志鹏 , , 等. 基于机器学习方法的测井岩相分类研究. 地球物理学进展, 2024, 39 (3): 1173- 1192.
咏欣 , , 德文 , 等. 东海西湖凹陷富煤砂泥薄互层深度学习横波预测. 地球物理学进展, 2025, 40 (5): 2148- 2159.
宏伟 , 远锋 , 云银 , 等. 储层物性的地震预测技术综述. 地球物理学进展, 2021, 36 (2): 595- 610.
艳军 , 顶辉 , 远锋 . 基于自适应杂交遗传算法的CO2地质封存的储层参数反演研究. 地球物理学报, 2016, 59 (11): 4234- 4245.
年添 , , , 等. 地震油气储层的小样本卷积神经网络学习与预测. 地球物理学报, 2018, 61 (10): 4110- 4125.
培根, 希姆, 莱德肖. 2013. 三维地震解释. 程远锋, 王延光译. 北京: 石油工业出版社.
成禹 , 振岸 , 敦仕 , 等. 基于波动方程的叠前地震反演. 地球物理学报, 2019, 62 (2): 604- 618.
卫涛 , 嘉玮 , , 等. 孔隙介质弹性波频散-衰减理论模型. 地球物理学进展, 2015, 30 (2): 586- 600.
竟仪 , 治国 , 宇民 , 等. 深度人工神经网络在地震反演中的应用进展. 地球物理学进展, 2023, 38 (1): 298- 320.
威廉·艾思克罗夫特. 2017. 地震反射波勘探. 程远锋, 毕丽飞译. 东营: 中国石油大学出版社.
文采 . 非线性波动方程地震反演的方法原理及问题. 地球物理学进展, 1992, 7 (1): 9- 19.
兴耀 , 兆云 , 国忱 . 岩石物理驱动下地震流体识别研究. 中国科学: 地球科学, 2015, 45 (8): 8- 21.

感谢审稿专家提出的修改意见和编辑部的大力支持!

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Copyright ©2026 Progress in Geophysics. All rights reserved.
PDF(1482 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/