基于常规测井与可解释机器学习的深部煤系地层煤层识别与含煤性评价
Coal Seam Identification and Coal-Bearing Evaluation in Deep Coal Measures Based on Conventional Logging and Interpretable Machine Learning
摘要: 针对深部煤系地层中薄煤层、夹矸发育及纵向变化快造成的煤层边界识别和层段含煤性评价问题,基于某盆地东部某区块多井常规测井资料与已有解释结果,建立煤层概率识别和含煤性评价流程。模型输入包括AC、CAL、DEN、CNL、GR、RD、RS、SP和PE共9条常规曲线,以已有解释结论构建煤/非煤标签,采用类别加权L2正则化逻辑回归和留一井验证评价井间适用性;在单点特征基础上,进一步采用11个采样点的滑动窗口提取均值和标准差,以表征纵向上下文。结果表明,单点模型总体AUC为0.9867、召回率为0.9601;窗口模型总体AUC和召回率分别为0.9931和0.9668,但精确率有所下降,说明邻域统计有助于减少漏判,同时会扩大待复核范围。传统阈值法对典型煤层响应较为保守,概率模型则更适合筛选薄层、边界和响应不典型层段。通过概率分级、连续厚度约束、短间隔合并及井径质量复核,可将深度点输出转化为层段含煤性评价依据。该流程用于常规解释基础上的概率复核和层段量化,不能替代人工综合解释。
Abstract: Thin coal seams, abundant partings and rapid vertical variations complicate coal-boundary identification and interval-scale coal-bearing evaluation in deep coal measures. Multi-well conventional logs and existing interpretations from an eastern block of a sedimentary basin were used to establish a probabilistic workflow. Nine logs (AC, CAL, DEN, CNL, GR, RD, RS, SP and PE) were used as predictors. Coal and non-coal labels were derived from existing interpretations, and class-weighted L2-regularized logistic regression was assessed by leave-one-well-out validation. Means and standard deviations within an 11-sample sliding window were further introduced to represent vertical context. The point model achieved an overall AUC of 0.9867 and recall of 0.9601. The context model increased AUC and recall to 0.9931 and 0.9668, respectively, while precision decreased, indicating fewer missed coal responses but a broader review range. The conventional threshold method remained conservative for typical coal responses, whereas probability output was more suitable for screening thin seams, boundaries and atypical intervals. Probability grading, continuity constraints, short-gap merging and borehole-quality checks were combined to support interval-scale coal-bearing evaluation. The workflow is intended for probabilistic review rather than as a replacement for integrated manual interpretation.
文章引用:李向东, 刘阳. 基于常规测井与可解释机器学习的深部煤系地层煤层识别与含煤性评价[J]. 矿山工程, 2026, 14(5): 1201-1208. https://doi.org/10.12677/me.2026.145118

参考文献

[1] 范萌萌, 袁珍, 李文厚, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地延安地区本溪组高分辨率层序地层与沉积特征[J]. 西北大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 54(6): 1050-1064.
[2] 刘翰林, 邹才能, 尹帅, 等. 中国煤系气形成分布、甜点评价与展望[J]. 天然气工业, 2024, 44(10): 1-21.
[3] 赵喆, 徐旺林, 赵振宇, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地石炭系本溪组煤岩气地质特征与勘探突破[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2024, 51(2): 234-247, 259.
[4] 刘新社, 黄道军, 虎建玲, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地中东部地区石炭系本溪组煤岩气储层特征[J]. 天然气工业, 2024, 44(10): 51-62.
[5] 张正涛, 费世祥, 罗文琴, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地东部本溪组煤岩气储集层评价及甜点区优选[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2025, 46(3): 263-272.
[6] 葛祥, 李涛. 煤层物性测井评价方法初探[J]. 测井技术, 2003, 27(2): 129-131, 177.
[7] 孟召平, 刘珊珊, 王保玉, 等. 晋城矿区煤体结构及其测井响应特征研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2015, 43(2): 58-63, 67.
[8] 付玉通, 张伟, 李永臣, 等. 鄂东南地区深部煤层气煤体结构测井评价研究[J]. 中国煤炭, 2017, 43(9): 31-34, 47.
[9] 梅放, 康永尚, 李喆, 等. 中高煤阶煤层煤体结构识别测井法适用性评价研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2019, 47(7): 95-107.
[10] 李松林, 逄建东, 金力钻, 等. 煤体结构测井评价在煤层气开发中的应用[J]. 测井技术, 2021, 45(2): 173-178.
[11] 肖航, 张占松, 郭建宏, 等. 基于随机森林结合地球物理测井资料的煤体结构识别方法及应用[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2021, 21(24): 10174-10180.
[12] 高笑琳. 煤层气测井响应特征的识别与评价[J]. 价值工程, 2021, 40(18): 180-181.
[13] Hosmer, D.W., Lemeshow, S. and Sturdivant, R.X. (2013) Applied Logistic Regression. 3rd Edition, Wiley.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118548387
[14] Breiman, L. (2001) Random Forests. Machine Learning, 45, 5-32.
https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1010933404324
[15] Molnar, C. (2020) Interpretable Machine Learning. Lulu Press.