Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 15 – 22

www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

Genetic algorithms in oil industry: An overview

Oswaldo Velez-Langs*
Departamento de Informática, Estadı́stica y Telemática, Escuela Superior de Ciencias Experimentales y Tecnologı́a,
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, 28933 Mostoles, Madrid, Spain
Facultad de Ingenierı́as, Corporación Universitaria del Sinú, Carrera 1w Calle 38, Monteria, Colombia
Received 31 August 2004; accepted 29 November 2004

Abstract

The study presented here is directed to accumulate the body of knowledge which is up to now built around the techniques of
Evolutionary Computation in the Oil Industry, particularly in the Exploration and Production business. The models presented
cover specific aspects of application in reservoir characterization; nevertheless applications in other aspects are shown. The
results are directed to improve the satisfaction by the performance of the methods of simulation of those properties in the
reservoir characterization that have impact in the petroleum production. Additionally a brief framework is presented for the
conception of evolutionary engineered reservoir characterization systems.
D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Evolutionary algorithms; Genetic algorithms; Reservoir characterization; Seismic inversion; Exploration; Production

1. Introduction realistic models can be generated for improved

The use of computer-aided techniques to assist in
the reservoir characterisation process is becoming
standard in the oil industry. As computers become
faster and more computing power is made affordable,
companies dedicate more resources to data analysis.
The techniques aim at the incorporation into the
reservoir models of all data available so that more
* Departamento de Informática, Estadı́stica y Telemática, Escuela
Superior de Ciencias Experimentales y Tecnologı́a, Universidad
Rey Juan Carlos, 28933 Mostoles, Madrid, Spain. Fax: +34 91 488
7049.
E-mail address: ovelez@escet.urjc.es.
0920-4105/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2004.11.006
prediction capabilities. bIntelligent techniques such
as neural computing, fuzzy reasoning, and evolu-
tionary computing for data analysis and interpretation
are an increasingly powerful tool for making break-
throughs in the science and engineering fields by
transforming the data into information and information
into knowledgeQ, as it is mentioned in Nikravesh and
Aminzadeh (2001). The process makes use of meas-
urements made on the field to restrict the range of
values that the parameters might take. The measure-
ments used are wide-ranging and include seismic data,
data from geological analogues, core and log data from
wells, well test data, and production data. The result of
the process is a set of flow simulation models that, to a
16 O. Velez-Langs / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 15–22
greater or lesser extent, agree with the measurements
made upon the reservoir. There are very many papers
in the literature that describe this process, including
Oliver et al. (1996), Tan and Kalogerakis (1996), Wu
et al. (1999) and Floris et al. (2001).
To properly characterise the flow simulation model
requires that every part of the reservoir be adequately
described. Direct inversion of the complete model is
not a practical proposition, so it is necessary to
introduce a coarse grid of pilot points (or control
points) and some interpolation method. There are
numerous papers that discuss the choice of pilot points
and interpolation methods (Bissell, 1994; Cuypers et
al., 1998). Having selected these, some optimisation
technique is needed to match the numerical results to
the measurements. Most attempts to automate this
process have used gradient-type methods. In Nikravesh
et al. (2003) we have a fully devoted book in soft
computing techniques for oil exploration main subjects
of: geophysical analysis, computational geology, res-
ervoir and production engineering, nevertheless one
paper more adequate to this is found in McCormack et
al. (1999). Our work intends to introduce in a
comprehensive study, the body of knowledge up to
now built around the techniques of Evolutionary
Computation in the oil industry, particularly in the
exploration and production business, doing special
mention to the advantages that these offer to oil
industry.
Evolutionary systems have been studied for possible
applications to optimisation problems. Evolutionary
computation techniques such as Genetic Algorithms
Data
Management
Geology
Electric
Records
Core
Obtention
Geophysical
Production
Geostatistical
Hardware
Fig. 1. Multidisciplinary aspects involved in the management and simulation of reservoirs from Saleri (1998).
(GAs), Evolutionary Strategies (ESs), Classifier Sys-
tems (CSs), and Evolutionary Programming (EP), draw
their inspiration from nature. Particularly, Genetic
Algorithms (GAs) were proposed by Holland (1975)
as an abstraction of biological evolution drawing on
ideas from natural evolution and genetics for the design
and implementation of robust adaptive systems. Over
the last 20 years, GAs have received much attention
because of their potential as optimisation techniques
for complex functions and an extensive number of
applications (Goldberg, 1989; Michalewicz, 1992).
The paper is organized in the following way: The
second section shows aspects for to keep in mind of
the advantage to use Evolutionary Algorithms in oil
Industry problems. The third section illustrates a short
framework for to mix Evolutionary Computation in a
Reservoir Characterization Problem, the quarter sec-
tion reflected works and applications and finally
something final comments.
2. Why evolutionary algorithms in oil industry?
There is an inherent complexity when one tries to
carry out a project of simulation of a reservoir (Saleri,
1998), own need arises to handle the whole synergy (as
is illustrated in Fig. 1) with the most adequate methods
that permit it. We find in computational methods
inspired in the same nature an important alternative.
Genetic algorithm (GA) is one of the stochastic
optimization methods which is simulating the process
of natural evolution. GA follows the same principles
Reservoir
Field
Development
Surface
Operations Monitoring
Software Environment
Labor Others
 O. Velez-Langs / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 15–22
as those in nature (survival of the fittest, Charles
Darwin). Although initially they were proposed as an
academic investigation, today GAs turn out to be one
of the most promising approaches for dealing with
complex systems which at first nobody could imagine
that from a relative modest technique. GA is
applicable to multi-objectives optimization and can
handle conflicts among objectives. Therefore, it is
robust where multiple solutions exist. In addition, it is
highly efficient and it is easy to use.
GAs starts with an initial population of feasible
solutions (individuals) to the problem being
addressed. Individual solutions are then selected from
the population according to a stochastic process that
(in some sense) rewards to the individuals with better
performance, and their genetic information is recom-
bined and modified following probabilistic transition
rules such as the genetic operators to form a new
population. The process is repeated until a conver-
gence is detected, or a specified maximum number of
function evaluations or a generation is reached.
The formulation of a GA for a specific problem
requires the definition of three main issues: the design
of the genome to contain the variables that define a
possible solution and the generation of the phenotype
(a realisation of the reservoir simulation model), the
selection and breeding structures used to generate
solutions, and the genetic operators such as crossover
and mutation used to generate new solutions. This is
the same approach for the direct application in
Reservoir Characterization Problem.
In biological terms, the genotype is the information
contained in the genetic code (or genome), and the
physical representation of this information is the
phenotype. Likewise, in the language of genetic
algorithms, the array of variables is the genotype and
the numerical model is the phenotype. Hence, all the
variables required to construct the appropriate numer-
ical reservoir simulation model without ambiguity can
be specified in a large one-dimensional array. This
implies a one-to-one correspondence between geno-
type and phenotype. However is possible, and more
practical, to establish a one–many correspondence that
show the spatial relationship of the geostatistical
components of this problem join with the properties
of the field as porosity and permeability for example.
The result is the modified GA for Reservoir character-
ization (Romero et al., 2000).
17
The initialization process is delineated to
continuation:
! The initial values of the geostatistical parameters
are drawn randomly from their a priori probability
distribution Functions.
! Sets of well data are generated which are consistent
with both the measurements for the field properties
at every well (for example permeability) and the
estimated errors for each well measurement.
! The third step involves the use of a geostatistical
method to generate complete petrophysical prop-
erty fields for each set of well measurements.
The selection process is based on the evaluation of the
fitness of the individual models. The fitness of an
individual corresponds to its objective function and this
function can be defined, for example, as the weighted
sum of squared errors related to the measurements. The
elitism practice let that the better individual in the
generation n can be cloned to the generation n+1.
The crossover operator for the multidimensional
chromosomes used the mask method. A mask is
generated to define from which parent a particular
gene (data point or well zone) is copied. The mask is
defined by randomly choosing a row over the relevant
simulation layer, and switching the array elements
located thereafter. This process is repeated on each
layer.
Not one but various mutation operators could be
designed in these cases. For the many real number
chromosomes, mutation operators should include
cases in which the mutation can be for a random
change assuming a uniform probability density func-
tion and cases in which the mutation can be change by
a small random quantity assuming a quadratic prob-
ability density function centred on the current value.
3. Inserting evolutionary components in reservoir
characterization
Upon developing a Evolutionary Computation (EC)
System, a programmer writes code that creates and
manipulates (in a form pre-specified) certain software
components or populations, this code and its pre
specification in the behaviour permit that these soft-
ware components be found established in a concrete
18 O. Velez-Langs / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 15–22

framework, the EC takes place precisely inside this
framework and many times is not extensible out of this
framework. Then we can begin to consider the effects
that can be presented outside of this framework.
Oil exploration and production is the process of
discovering and developing new petroleum or natural
gas reservoirs. Typically, the process starts with a
thorough analysis of the geology in a potential region,
particularly the probability of finding hydrocarbons
(oil or gas), and the economic factors such as risk and
investment needed. If it is decided to explore for
resources in the region, a seismic exploration survey
is conducted. In a survey, a controlled sound source is
used to set off sound waves. These waves penetrate
the earth, propagate, reflect, refract and then reach
back to the surface of the earth where they are
recorded by geophones or hydrophones.
Reservoir characterization is a critical step in
reservoir development and future production manage-
ment. Knowing the details of a reservoir allows the
simulation of different scenarios. The problem, how-
ever, is to define an accurate and suitable reservoir
model including small-scale heterogeneity. Currently,
the most abundant data about the reservoir, which is
the seismic data, do not have enough resolution. The
typical resolution of seismic data is on the order of
100 feet or more, which does not give enough detail
of reservoir properties. In contrast, well log data,
which are collected by inserting sensing devices into
an exploratory well, give an excellent description of
the well at scales ranging from centimetres to
hundreds of meters. However, due to its high cost,
only a few well locations have log data. This scarce
information is usually not sufficient to build a
reservoir model that includes the small scale varia-
tions. In between wells, geological information needs
to be estimated.
A viable approach to construct a reservoir model is
using both seismic and well log data. This approach
first builds a framework using seismic scale and well
log scale data, then fills in small details using
statistical or soft computing methods. These methods
are generally stochastic in nature, hence they generate
many different realizations (reservoir models). This
trait is actually an advantage, since the uncertainties of
the different scenarios can be studied by generating a
large number of equally possible reservoir models.
Consequently, this approach of applying stochastic
methods on seismic and well log data is widely used
in reservoir characterization (Xie, 2001; Wong et al.,
2002; Nikravesh et al., 2003).
When to design a Reservoir Characterization
Problem with incorporated EC characteristics, we
should set aside the typical software process when
doing a genetic algorithm. As was said previously a
GA is a program that stores individuals represented by
structures of data and manipulates these individuals to
generate successive populations. This works in a
centralized way and does not exist in the natural
equivalent of this algorithm. However, the evolutive
effects arise to Reservoir Characterization Problem. A
small modification of the approach presented in
Velez-Langs (2002) permits us to identify the existing
relations among an adaptive (evolutionary) process

Table 1
Adaptive process dimensions and reservoir characterization components identification
Adaptive dimensions
Meaning of the adaptation (What is adapted?)
Adaptation process (How to adapt to the system?)
Adaptation content (What is the criterion?)
Objective (What is the reason of the adaptation?)
Reservoir characterization problem
Beings (elements) that participate in the evolution process: geostatistical parameters
and data, spatial relationship, field properties at every well
Perception of the environment by elements and relations of these that assure a
decentralized selection process: objective function as the weighted sum of squared
errors, mask generated from a particular gene in a parent (data point or well zone) for
the crossover, elitism criterion, mutation based in random change assuming a uniform
probability density function
Energy, aptitude or capacity of the elements to perform a task or to utilize certain
resources: adequate aptitude to generate a simulation model to production data
(history matching) for example
Functionality of each element, global functionality: suite of solutions (corresponding
to different realisations of the reservoir model) from which to select a representative
group for further analysis
 O. Velez-Langs / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 15–22
and the Reservoir Characterization Problem compo-
nents. Table 1 shows it more clearly.
4. Practical works and applications
Most geoscience’s applications began in early
1990s. Gallagher and Sambridge (1994) presented
an excellent overview on the use of GAs in
seismology. Other applications include geochemical
analysis, well logging and seismic interpretation.
This section tries to illustrate diverse works that
have used the Evolutionary Computation paradigm in
Oil industry, we have tried to organize this summary
under the aspects of Reservoir Characterization, Gas
Storage, Seismic Inversion, Engine Oil Development
and Oil Field Development. The organization is not
unique and not flexible since there are works that mix
diverse aspects of them established previously.
4.1. Reservoir characterization
The work of Batyrshin et al. (2005) describes a
methodology based on the use of hybrid methods,
such as principal component and factor analysis,
fuzzy classification and evolutionary optimizations
for analysis of well logs and for qualitative pore
structure classification in carbonate formations. The
developed approach does not require any previous
assumptions to construct a model from the measured
data set. Obviously, as a pattern recognition techni-
que, it needs a good data set, valid and representative
of different features present in the reservoir under
study.
The constructed porosity classification models can
be applied to make predictions for the wells from the
oil reservoirs pertaining to micro-fractured carbonate
formations. This approach can be extended to the rock
type characterization in the absence of adequate
geological information.
Bush and Carter (1996) try to match the simulation
model to the measured history of a reservoir by
adjusting some of the model parameters, it happens
that more than one optimum exists, more than one set
of parameters which reproduce the measured history
of the reservoir were found. The challenge is to
identify all the optima that are using as few function
evaluations as possible.
19
Soleng (1999) presents a genetic algorithm that is
applied to the problem of conditioning the petrophys-
ical rock properties of a reservoir model on historic
production data. He has applied a genetic algorithm to
the difficult optimization problem where each evalua-
tion of the objective function implies a flow simu-
lation of the whole reservoir. Ten independent runs are
used to give a prediction with an uncertainty estimate
for the total future oil production using two different
production strategies.
The work of Romero et al. (2000) describes the
implementation of a Genetic Algorithm (GA) to carry
out hydrocarbon reservoir characterisation by condi-
tioning the reservoir simulation model to production
data (history matching) on a predefined geological and
structural model. The proposed technique combines the
advantages of the pilot point method for the description
of petrophysical properties with the advantages of GAs
for global optimisation. The modified GA uses a
complex genome which is divided into seven separate
chromosomes for different types of reservoir parame-
ters. Chromosomes containing the pilot point informa-
tion are three-dimensional real number structures
which include information for the wells, while the
chromosomes for all other parameters are one-dimen-
sional arrays. Specially designed crossover and muta-
tion operators have been created to work with the non-
standard genome structure. The main advantage of this
work is that the method appears to be reasonably
insensitive to the parameter settings used to control the
GA, which makes it suitable as a general automatic
reservoir characterisation algorithm. It also requires
only a modest number of forward simulations, and can
be readily implemented (and parallelised) for com-
puter-aided history matching.
In Rahman et al. (2001), an integrated novel model
for hydraulic fracturing design optimization is pre-
sented, which recognizes complex interactions
between a hydraulically coupled fracture geometry
module, a hydrocarbon production module and an
investment-return cash flow module. Free design
variables are identified and various design constraints
are formulated, which must be satisfied so that an
optimum design obtained is executable in the field
using the specified surface equipment (pump, tubing,
etc.) and that treatment does not cause any undesirable
formation damage by uncontrolled fracture growth
and/or multiple secondary fracture initiation. The
20 O. Velez-Langs / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 15–22
model is formulated within the framework of a
multivariate and multiobjective optimization method,
which is based on the combined features of Genetic
Algorithm and Evolutionary Operation.
A new approach for modelling the dynamic process
of Fluid flow in porous media is presented in Yu and
Lee (2002). They propose using a Genetic Algorithm
(GA) as an inverse method to model fluid flow in a pore
network Cellular Automaton (CA). This GA evolves
the CA to produce specified flow dynamic responses.
The method is applied to a rock sample data set.
In Yu et al. (2003), a hybrid GP-fuzzy approach to
model reservoir permeability is presented. This
approach uses a two-step divide-and-conquer process
for modelling. First, GP is applied to construct
classifiers that identify permeability ranges. Within
each range, ANFIS is employed to build a Takagi-
Sugeno-Kang fuzzy inference system that gives
permeability estimation. This method is applied to
five well log data sets. The results show that this
hybrid system gives more accurate permeability
estimation than other previous works.
Yang et al. (2003) present a paper with novel
integrated models to analyze the production-injection
operation systems (PIOS) for the reservoirs based on
the concepts of systems engineering. More specifi-
cally, gas and/or water injection, reservoir and
production performance, and the economic assess-
ment are incorporated into these models. Four
production operation methods are considered in the
production models. The reservoir geological model is
improved with time by the on-going monitoring
results for better performance evaluation and predic-
tion. The non-numerical parallel algorithms, including
genetic algorithms and simulated annealing algo-
rithms, are employed to optimize and control the
nonlinear PIOS under different practical constraints
throughout the life of a reservoir.
4.2. Gas storage
The objective of the study of Mohaghegh (2003)
provides a methodology, and builds a software tool
based on this methodology, to address questions related
to the stimulation/re-stimulation process in gas storage
wells for to minimize costs. The ultimate output of the
software tool is a list of the re-stimulation candidates for
each year. The list will contain the selected candidates
and specifies whether that particular candidate should
be re-fractured or chemically treated. In this study the
author uses a series of artificial neural networks and
genetic algorithm routines integrated with an extensive
relational database–specifically developed for this
study–to achieve the goals of the project.
The Msc Thesis of Torres (2001), in Spanish,
shows a general application model in gas reservoir
simulation merging elements of the evolutionary
computing and object-oriented paradigms. The model
works in three ways:
1. Make an adaptive grid partition of the 3D structure
in basis to a non-linear function.
2. Solve the non-linear algebraic equation systems in
each block which are generated for the calculation
of the gas properties, taking advantage of the object-
oriented programming and genetic algorithms, this
method is mainly advised when there are problems
with typical methods like Newton method.
3. Find out an adaptive pressure distribution through-
out the reservoir in basis to a double exponential
function. Finally the model joins the three sub-
models to give solution to the non-linear equations
system depicting the gas flow through the reservoir.
4.3. Seismic inversion
Mansanné and Schoenauer (2000) try to cover an
interesting challenge of the last 20 years in geo-
physics: the determination of the structure of the
underground data from geophysical prospecting. The
goal of the inverse problem in seismic reflection is to
identify the velocity distribution in the underground
from recorded reflection profiles of acoustic waves.
The problem is turned into an optimization problem
whose objective function is quite irregular. Indeed, it
is highly nonlinear, exhibits several local minima and
can be globally discontinuous. An efficient way to
find a global optimum (or a good local optimum) is to
use Genetic Algorithms. The work presented in this
paper relies on the use of a hybrid GA based on a
variable-length piecewise-constant representation
built on Voronoi diagrams.
In the Boschetti’s PhD thesis (1995) aspects of
inversion of potential field data with GA are covered. It
presented a GA that simultaneously generates a large
number of solutions to various potential field inverse
 O. Velez-Langs / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 15–22
problems. It shows that in simple cases a satisfactory
description of the ambiguity domain inherent in
potential field problems can be efficiently obtained
by a simple analysis of the ensemble of solutions. From
this analysis information about the expected bounds of
the unknown parameters as well as a measure of the
reliability of the final solution can also be obtained.
A new and interesting application field of EC is
named Interactive Evolutionary Computation (IEC).
Here, we have one method which provides the
inclusion of qualitative geological expertise within a
rigorous mathematical inversion scheme by simply
asking an expert user to evaluate a sequence of forward
geological models. This was presented by Wijns et al.
(2003). The inverse modeling technique proposed in
this way can help every time that a problem needs
visual evaluation of the results or a priori expert
knowledge. All that is required is a code that allows the
user to forward a model process and view its result.
4.4. Engine oil development
Yu and Rutherford (2001) demonstrate the gener-
ation of an engine test model using Genetic Program-
ming. In particular, a two-phase modelling process is
proposed to handle the high-dimensionality and sparse-
ness natures of the engine test data. The resulting model
gives high accuracy prediction on training data.
4.5. Oil field development
The paper of Túpac et al. (2002) presents a Genetic
Algorithm application for selecting the best alternative
for oil field development under uncertainty. The
alternatives in this study are related to the arrangement
of wells in a known and delimited oil reservoir and
serve as a basis for calculating the net present value,
which is used to measure optimization: the optimal
alternative is the one that maximizes the Net Present
Value of the field. The results obtained have revealed
that it is possible to discover the characteristics of the
field when this method is used and that it achieves good
results.
4.6. Production scheduling
De Almeida et al. (2001) presents a review of the
multiobjective fitness evaluation method called
21
energy minimization, and presents an analysis of the
method’s behavior when used in a genetic algorithm
applied to production scheduling of a petroleum
refinery. The experimental results are presented and
analyzed, leading to an overall evaluation of the
benefits provided by the model.
5. Final comments
The work described here presents the state of the
art in engineering applications from a point of view of
the computational theory of the adaptation and the
evolution for applications in Oil industry. It is vital to
understand and to be able to delineate the specific
aspects of the reservoir characterization domain and to
observe like the EC paradigm presents techniques
inherently distributed that are of private interest in the
field mentioned. The use of this techniques offers a
true benefit in exploration and production business.
Our future work is to propose the construction of a
Computational Intelligence Software tool (using
especially GAs but not ruling out the possibility of
using techniques of Fuzzy Systems of Neural Net-
works) focused in reservoir characterization field,
adaptable to the needs and preferences of their users in
relation to the domain characteristics. Through EC
which works if possible in a distributed environment,
this tool will be able to apply the developed EC
methods to carry out the characterisation of a real
reservoir for a major petroleum company. The
development of this proposal intends to give solution
to low performance in adaptability of the traditional
developed systems at this time.
References
Batyrshin, I., Sheremetov, L., Markov, M., Panova, A., 2005.
Hybrid method for porosity classification in carbonate forma-
tions. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 47, 36 – 50 (in this volume).
Bissell, R., 1994. Calculating optimal parameters for history
matching. Proc. Fourth European Conference on the Mathe-
matics of Oil Recovery, Roros, Norway.
Boschetti, F., 1995. Application of Genetic Algorithms to the
Inversion of Geophysical Data. PhD thesis in Mathematical
Geophysics. University of Western Australia, Perth.
Bush, M.D., Carter, J.N., 1996. Application of a modified genetic
algorithm to parameter estimation in the petroleum industry. In:
Dagli, C., Akay, E., Philip-Chen, C.L., Fernandez, B., Ghosh, J.
22 O. Velez-Langs / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 15–22
(Eds.), Intelligent Engineering Systems through Artificial Neural
Networks, vol. 6. ASME Press, New York.
Cuypers, M., Dubrule, O., Lamy, P., Bissell, R., 1998. Optimal
choice of inversion parameters for history-matching with the
pilot point method. Proc. Sixth European Conference on the
Mathematics of Oil Recovery, Peebles, Scotland.
De Almeida, M.R., Hamacher, S., Pacheco, M.A.C., Vellasco,
M.B.R., 2001. The energy minimization method: a multiobjective
fitness evaluation technique and its application to the produc-
tion scheduling in a petroleum refinery. Proc. of the 2001
Congress on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 1, pp. 560 – 567.
Seoul, Korea.
Floris, F.J.T., Bush, M.D., Cuypers, M., Roggero, F., Syversveen,
A.R., 2001. Methods for quantifying the uncertainty of produc-
tion forecasts—a comparative study. J. Pet. Geosci. 7, 87 – 96.
Gallagher, K., Sambridge, M., 1994. Genetic algorithms: a powerful
tool for large-scale nonlinear optimization problems. Comput.
Geosci. 20 (7–8), 1229 – 1236.
Goldberg, D.E., 1989. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimiza-
tion and Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, NY.
Holland, J.H., 1975. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems:
An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology,
Control, and Artificial Intelligence. University of Michigan
Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
Mansanné, F., Schoenauer, M., 2002. An automatic geophysical
inversion procedure using a genetic algorithm. In: Wong, P.,
Aminzadeh, F., Nikravesh, M. (Eds.), Soft Computing for
Reservoir Characterization and Modeling, Studies in Fuzziness
and Soft Computing, vol. 80. Physica-Verlag, pp. 331 – 353.
McCormack, M., Stoisits, R., MacAllister, D., Crawford, K., 1999.
Applications of genetic algorithms in exploration and produc-
tion. Lead. Edge 18 (6), 716 – 719.
Michalewicz, Z., 1992. Genetic Algorithms+Data Structures=Evo-
lution Programs. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Mohaghegh, S.D., 2003. Enhancing gas storage wells deliver-
ability using intelligent systems. In: Nikravesh, M., Aminza-
deh, F., Zadeh, L. (Eds.), Soft Computing and Intelligent Data
Analysis in Oil Exploration. Elsevier Science, the Netherlands,
pp. 445 – 467.
Nikravesh, M., Aminzadeh, F., 2001. Past, present and future
intelligent reservoir characterization trends. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 31
(2–4), 67 – 79.
Nikravesh, M., Aminzadeh, F., Zadeh, L., 2003. Soft Computing and
Intelligent Data Analysis in Oil Exploration. Developments in
Petroleum Science, vol. 51. Elsevier Science, the Netherlands.
Oliver, D.S., He, N., Reynolds, A.C., 1996. Conditioning perme-
ability fields to pressure data. Proc. Fifth European Conference
on the Mathematics of Oil Recovery, Leoben, Austria, pp. 3 – 6.
Rahman, M.M., Rahman, M.K., Rahman, S.S., 2001. An integrated
model for multiobjective design optimization of hydraulic
fracturing. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 31 (1), 41 – 62.
Romero, C.E., Carter, J.N., Zimmerman, R.W., Gringarten, A.C.,
2000. A modified genetic algorithm for reservoir character-
ization. Proc. of the 2000 SPE Seventh International Oil and Gas
Conference and Exhibition, Beijing, China.
Saleri, N.G., 1998. Re-engineering simulation: managing com-
plexity and complexification in reservoir projects. Proc. of
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver,
Colorado.
Soleng, H.H., 1999. Oil reservoir production forecasting with
uncertainty estimation using genetic algorithms. Proc. of the
Congress on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 2, pp. 1217 – 1223.
Tan, T.B., Kalogerakis, N., 1996. Improved reservoir character-
ization using automatic matching procedures. J. Can. Pet.
Technol. 32 (6), 26 – 33.
Torres, J.L., 2001. Un Modelo Genético-Objetual para la Simu-
lación de Yacimientos de Gas. Msc. thesis. Facultad de Minas,
Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Medellin.
Túpac, Y.J., Vellasco, M.M.B.R., Pacheco, M.A.C., 2002. Selec-
tion of alternatives for oil field development by genetic
algorithms. Rev. Eng. Térm. Spec. Ed. 2, 51 – 54.
Velez-Langs, O., 2002. Agents systems: a perspective from evolu-
tionary computation. Proc. of 4th International Conference on
Recent Advances in Soft Computing, Nottingham, United
Kingdom.
Wijns, C., Boschetti, F., Moresi, L., 2003. Inverse modelling in
geology by interactive evolutionary computation. J. Struct.
Geol. 25 (10), 162 – 1615.
Wong, P.M., Aminzadeh, F., Nikravesh, M., 2002. Soft computing
for reservoir characterization and modeling. Series Studies in
Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol. 80. Physical-Verlag.
Wu, Z., Reynolds, A.C., Oliver, D.S., 1999. Conditioning geo-
statistical models to two-phase production data. SPE J. 4 (2),
142 – 155.
Xie, D., 2001. Thin-bed Reservoir Characterization using Integrated
3-D Seismic and Well Log Data: a Case Study of the Central
Boonsville Field, Fort Worth Basin, North-Central Texas, PhD
thesis. Michigan Technological University, Houghton.
Yang, D., Zhang, Q., Gu, Y., 2003. Integrated optimization and
control of the production-injection operation systems for
hydrocarbon reservoirs. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 37 (1–2), 69 – 81.
Yu, T., Lee, S., 2002. Evolving cellular automata to model fluid
flow in porous media. Proc of the 2002 NASA/DoD Conference
on Evolvable Hardware. IEEE Press, pp. 210 – 218.
Yu, T., Rutherford, J., 2001. Modeling sparse engine test data using
genetic programming. Proc. of The Seventh ACM SIGKDD
International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data
Mining, San Francisco, California.
Yu, T., Wilkinson, D., Xie, D., 2003. A hybrid GP-fuzzy
approach for reservoir characterization. In: Riolo, R.L., Worzel,
B. (Eds.), Genetic Programming Theory and Practice. Kluwer,
pp. 271 – 290.