Table 5 Prediction and evaluation of the timing for SWF in ASP flooding fields.
ID | Block Name | Predicted Water Cut of Original Plan (%) | Optimized Predicted Water Cut (%) | Adjustment of Injection Plan | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Predicted by Calculation Method in Sect. 1 | Predicted by Machine Learning Model | Relative Errors | Adjustment Method | Actual Water Cut (%) | |||
1 | X34D2 | 97.23 | 95.85 | 95.62 | 0.240 | Early Transition to SWF | 95.65 |
2 | X7D1 | 96.55 | 97.09 | 97.32 | 0.237 | Extended Polymer Slug | 97.27 |
3 | B2DZ | 94.63 | 96.09 | 95.83 | 0.271 | Extended Polymer Slug | 95.85 |
4 | B2XD | 92.27 | 95.58 | 95.2 | 0.398 | Extended Polymer Slug | 95.18 |
5 | B2DX | 94.52 | 96.49 | 96.74 | 0.259 | Extended Polymer Slug | 96.72 |
6 | N6D | 96.38 | 96.88 | 97.25 | 0.382 | Extended Polymer Slug | 97.22 |
