Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ain Shams Engineering Journal

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com

Engineering Physics and Mathematics

Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural

network: An innovative technique to understand complex carbonate
systems
Abdulaziz M. Abdulaziz a,⇑, Samar S. Hawary b
a
Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza 12613, Egypt
b
Petrosannan Petroleum Company, No 70 ST 21 El-Tagammoa El-Khames (5th Settlement), Cairo, Egypt

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

Article history: The analysis of carbonate reservoirs over the past decades showed a great complexity due to the compli-
Received 20 February 2019 cated pore pattern and petrofabrics developed by the complex factors prevailed their depositional and
Revised 6 January 2020 diagenetic history. In the present study, an artificial neural network (ANN) with feedforward backprop-
Accepted 16 January 2020
agation facilitated the direct prediction of carbonate diagenesis from log records of 12 wells penetrating
Available online xxxx
four different petroleum reservoirs of various characteristics. Logs and core data are analyzed for diage-
nesis quantification (to calculate the diagenesis coefficient or D-coefficient) and relating these diagenesis
Keywords:
values to the known types of diagenesis and pore types. The final ANN output model developed a numer-
Artificial neural network
Prediction of diagenesis
ical scale between 0 and 10 for carbonate rocks diagenesis and have alternatively been compared to the
Carbonate rocks dominant diagenesis in the corresponding core samples to identify possible relationships. Results showed
Well logs that the D-coefficients of 0–3.8 indicate Stylolite or/compaction diagenesis, while the 3.8–6.5 coefficients
mark dolomitization/recrystallization diagenesis and the 6.5–10 coefficients are reserved to dissolution
diagenesis. Such results highlight the efficiency of ANN in diagenesis quantification using well log mea-
surements for better characterization of complex carbonate systems.
Ó 2020 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams Uni-
versity. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction constructed wave-resistant structures above the level of adjacent

Carbonate rocks are formed by chemical, biological, and detrital
process that dominantly involve skeletal remains and supplemen-
tary biological constituents including lime mud (skeletal), fecal
pellets and microbialy arbitrated cement/lime muds [1–3]. Biofa-
cies often correlate lithofacies in carbonate sediments due to the
fact that organisms usually produce typical lithofacies and sub-
strates [4–6]. Water energy, depth, photic zone, and basin configu-
ration are the main factors controlling organic productivity and
carbonate deposition [7,8]. Reefs, biostromes, and bioherms are
examples for in-place local deposition where organisms have
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: amabdul@miners.utep.edu (A.M. Abdulaziz).
Peer review under responsibility of Ain Shams University.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
time-equivalent sediments [4,9,10]. The texture of carbonates
depends typically on the nature of the skeletal grains than on
external factors [4], and the intra-basin factors usually govern
the development of carbonate facies [11,12]. Carbonates usually
have widespread diagenetic changes including dissolution, recrys-
tallization, cementation, compaction, stylolite, and other architec-
tural deformation [13,14]. All petrophysical properties are affected
by diagenesis activity in carbonate rocks [15,16]. Despite the deep
burial of carbonate rocks, the diagenetic processes continue and
the deformation/fracture configuration are typically related to
the stress distribution and geometry [17].
Diagenesis refers to textural and mineralogical modifications
by physical, chemical, and/or biological processes from the time
of deposition and lithification [18]. Such processes continue as
long as the sediments are in contact with sufficient volumes of
chemically active fluids [19,20], either meteoric or marine (brack-
ish, normal salinity, or hyper saline). Diagenesis is generally
restricted to low temperature and pressure conditions, and
explicitly excludes processes and products associated with meta-
morphism [21]. Diagenetic processes are usually related to the

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
2090-4479/Ó 2020 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
2 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
environment of diagenesis that usually provides the overall
framework for interpreting the geometry of cemented and porous
units [22,23]. Several factors influence the onset of diagenetic
processes including the prevailing chemical conditions (Eh, pH,
and CO2), diffusion and ionic exchange rates, low-Mg calcite to
aragonite ratio, erosion rate, sediments prior diagenetic history,
grain size, organic matter availability, rate and composition of
interstitial hydrocarbon fluids, bacteria number, clay percent,
and physical conditions [24]. Diagenesis usually reduces the over-
all porosity through the various forms of cementation and min-
eral growth, but may increase porosity by leaching grain matrix
(dissolution) to form secondary pore spaces or create/redistribute
porosity via dolomitization [25,26]. Choquette and Pray [18] eval-
uated the relationship relating diagenesis to both porosity and
permeability in carbonate rocks while Nader [27] considered
dolomitization as the significant process of diagenesis in carbon-
ates that probably as important as deposition in formulating the
reservoir characteristics [20]. Dolomitization is faster in high-
Mg calcite than in low-Mg calcite because high Mg-calcite has
higher free energy than the low-Mg calcite [28].
Being porous and permeable, reservoir rocks inherit their elec-
trical properties from the current flow across pore fluids and clay
content [29]. Archie’s parameters (a, m, and n) are important fac-
tors influencing the calculation of reservoir water saturation (Sw)
and the key relationships in reservoir characterization such as
porosity-resistivity relationship, yet represent a major controversy
to assign their values [30,31]. Although these parameters may
appear constant for a particular sedimentary facies, predominantly
clastic facies, they could greatly vary among various facies or sub-
facies especially calcareous facies, and therefore considerable
errors in calculations typically arise with constant Archie parame-
ters [29]. Generally, Archie parameters appear greatly sensitive to
the pore and grain elongations with ‘m’ mostly dependent to the
pore fabric while ‘a’ mainly affected by both petro-fabric and pore
fabric. The parameter ‘a’ indicates the tortuosity to current flow
and depends in carbonates mainly on permeability, porosity, min-
eralogy, and formation factor. Whereas, the cementation factor ‘m’
is dependent mostly to the types and amount of porosity, perme-
ability, and formation factor. Since ‘a’ and ‘m’ are dependent almost
to the same factors, the parameter ‘a’ is inversely proportional to
the parameter ‘m’ with correlation coefficient approaching
0.95
[29].
Carbonate reservoirs are well known with complicated hetero-
geneity in petrofabrics and pore pattern due to the effect of intri-
cate factors prevailing their depositional and diagenetic history
[32–35]. These factors include depositional environment, burial
history, geothermal evolution, and diagenetic processes [36–38].
Such significant heterogeneities impose substantial challenges
towards the optimum characterization of calcareous reservoirs
for predicting reservoir quality, permeability, and/or hydrocarbon
saturation that in consequences influence the optimal field produc-
tion and recovery [39–41]. Thus, the stringent link between geo-
logical heterogeneity and reservoir quality should be thoroughly
distinguished to help understanding the essential properties of a
carbonate reservoir [17,42]. This requires the acquisition of com-
patible data capable of sampling the reservoir heterogeneity at a
suitable scale [17,43]. Conventional studies of carbonate diagenesis
usually apply various analytical techniques to identify and
characterize the diagenetic processes over a chronological
sequence [44–46,37,47–51].
Petrophysically, the formation factor ‘F’ and effective porosity
‘/’ represent the essential parameters controlling the electrical
properties that can be physically measured using either resistivity
and porosity logs or conventional core analysis. The formation
factor can be related mathematically to resistivity measurements
as in Eq. (1) [52].
Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
RO a
F¼ ¼ ð1Þ
Rw /m
where Ro is the true resistivity of water saturated formation, Rw is
formation water resistivity, and ‘/’ is the effective porosity.
Archie quantitatively calculated the formation water saturation
‘Sw’ using the formation factor as in Eq. (2).
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
n Rw
Sw ¼ F: ð2Þ
Rt
where n is the saturation exponent (~2) and Rt is the true resistivity.
Substituting the values of ‘F’ (Eq. (1)) to Eq. (2) yields two differ-
ent Sw values; one in terms of resistivity ‘Swr’ and the other in
terms of petrofabrics characteristics ‘Swa’ as respectively shown
in Eqs. (3) and (4).
sffiffiffiffiffi
n Ro
Swr ¼ ð3Þ
Rt
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
n a Rw
Swa ¼ : ð4Þ
/m Rt
These estimated water saturation values incorporate both
petrofabrics and pore-fabric characteristics and can be incorpo-
rated in evaluating the cementation factor in carbonate facies.
Diagenesis has remained a descriptive term for long time and
several attempts to quantify this term have been emerged over
the past few decades and still going on. Paraska et al. [53] dis-
cussed the various diagenesis modeling approaches developed
over the past two decades, yet, the model diversity hindered
assigning the best model to a precise aquatic system. The dataset,
processes, and parameters of over eighty models have been
reviewed and categorized but the selection of model factors were
always arbitrary. Despite the wide range of sedimentary environ-
ments in these models, the model complexity/techniques appear
(s) independent of the sedimentary environmental effects. How-
ever, the major opportunities to the model development could be
the conceptual model, input data accuracy, coupling of multiple
models, and public accessibility [53]. Recently, Ahm et al. [13]
quantified the early marine diagenesis prevailed the shallow mar-
ine carbonates using a numerical model that tracks the elemental
isotopic composition of primary precipitated and secondary car-
bonate minerals. They concluded that calcium and magnesium iso-
topes covariation represents a semi-quantitative estimation of the
extent and style of early marine diagenesis. In addition, Stolper
et al. [54] developed a mathematical model to quantify diagenesis
and explore its effect in modifying the clumped-isotope contents
using new dataset from the equatorial Pacific. They concluded that
this model provided a new constrained on diagenesis temperature
and can be applied to a variety of carbonate depositional setting.
Recently, Artificial Neural Network (ANN) has become a popular
technique widely applied in various petroleum engineering studies
to solve complex problems and/or predict reservoir properties [55].
Typically, ANN uses nonlinear processing techniques and apply
many computational algorithms to achieve the optimum perfor-
mance [56]. The effective mathematical function and the best com-
putational algorithm are determined through ANN training with
real dataset. A brief discussion to the types of ANN and their appli-
cations in petroleum engineering is briefly presented in [55].
In this work, an innovative technique based on ANN is devel-
oped to quantify and predict diagenesis in carbonate units using
well log measurements and core data from four different produc-
ing fields in the Western Desert, Egypt. Then, the results are related
to the main pore type and the prevailing diagenetic processes
within the carbonate system using core data.
 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx 3

2. Geological setting involves Paleocene-Middle Eocene sediments developed over a

The sedimentary successions of the Western Desert are devel-
oped through comprehensive marine transgression cycles with at
least three different tectonic phases. The first phase is the Caledo-
nian Orogeny prevailed the Middle Paleozoic, the second phase
‘Hercynian Orogeny’ dominated the Late Paleozoic, and the third
phase ‘Alpine Orogeny’ predominated the Jurassic – Tertiary [57].
Fig. 1 presents the geological column of Western Desert and the
majority of the producing zones fall within the Cretaceous-
Eocene intervals especially, Alamein, Abu Roash, and Apollonia for-
mation. Alamein formation involves a transgressive carbonate
sequence consisting of dolomite to micro-crystalline dolomitic
limestone with anhydrite stringers. It is characterized by variable
spatial porosity and permeability distribution. It represents a good
marker for the regional seismic interpretation in important pro-
ducing horizons of the Western Desert. Abu Roash formation is
mainly a calcareous sequence with clastics interbeds that had been
deposited in open shallow marine shelf. It has been subdivided into
7 members characterized from top-to-bottom as A to G and
extends between the upper Cenomanian and Coniacian [58]. The
members F, D, and B are rather clean carbonates while the other
members are essentially clastics. This succession corresponds to
two different phases; regressive and transgressive phases. The
regressive phase comprises the shallow clastic deposits; sand-
stones and shales. The transgressive phase reports the changes of
the shallow sediments into deep marine cryptocrystalline lime-
stone that may locally change into argillaceous and/or dolomitic
facies. During this phase, the limestone has been dolomitized with
dominant fracture and vuggy porosity, and a substantial sand is
developed but laterally grades into shale. Apollonia formation
large part within the north Western Desert with significant hiatus
identified in subsurface to involve all Paleocene and in some cases
extends to the Early Eocene. The Eocene sediments are dominantly
gray Nummulite limestone with subordinate shale with a total
thickness of 250 m at the type section exposed at the village of
Apollonia in Libya. It conformably overlies the Khoman formation
and underlies the Daba’a formation in the Egyptian basins (Gindi,
Abu Gharadig, and Natrun) with a significant thick section (1788)
developed at Gindi basin and along the depocenters (less than
100 m) straddling latitude 30N [59,60,58].
3. Datasets
The present study deals with well logs and core data from four
different oil fields in the Western Desert, Egypt; East Razzak
(ERZK), Salam (SALAM), North Ras Qattara (NRQ), and North Raz-
zak (NRZK) (Fig. 2). These data encompass an enormous range of
carbonate pore types that reflect the different diagenetic and depo-
sitional process. The studied wells penetrate various carbonate
intervals within the stratigraphic section of the Western Desert
(Fig. 1) as the ERZK field produces from the limestone of the Apol-
lonia Formation while Salam field penetrates the AR-G limestone.
Alternatively, NQR field targets the AR-G dolomite whereas the
NRZK field considers the dolomite of Alamein formation (Fig. 1).
Table 1 presents the available core and log data in each of the stud-
ied fields together with depth of logged/cored intervals. In each
field, 3 sets of well logs and core suits are investigated with depth
intervals of 3462–3859 ft. in ERZK field, 5408-5838ft in Salam field,
7611–7808 ft. in NRQ field, and 7911–9012 ft. in NRZK field
(Table 1). The available logs include caliper (CAL), spontaneous

Depositional Petroleum
W Lithology E Formation Age Environment System
Marmarica shallow marine
Miocene
Moghra
Source
Dabaa Oligocene Seal
Open marine
Apollonia Eocene
Khoman Seal
A
B
Upper Seal
C
Cretaceous Deltaic
D
Abu Roash Reservoir
E
shallow marine
F
Seal
G

Seal
Bahariya Reservoir
Kharita Reservoir
Dahab
Alamein Seal
Reservoir
Lower Fluvial deltaic
Cretaceous shallow marine
Alam El Bueib Source

Masajid

Khatatba Deltaic- Source

1000 feet Shallow marine
Jurassic Reservoir
Yakout Fluvial /
Lacustrine
Ras Qattara

Undeffer entiated Paleozoic Continental

Fig. 1. A composite Geologic column of the Western Desert [58].

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
4 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

tion is carefully accomplished using Gamma ray as a reference log.

Fig. 3 shows the depth matching at well NR-5 with log data shift of
about 3 ft. that achieved a correlation exceeding 98.7%.
NR-4
ER-3
NR-6 4. Methods
NR-5
ER-2
All well logs are visually reviewed and in some cases edited or
ER-1
filtered to discard anomalous log data and post processing residual
errors before the commence of data analysis. Various techniques
have been developed to calculate accurate reservoir characteristics
o / from well log records and the proper technique remains dependent
31 00
Mediterranean Sea N to the nature of reservoir units, available data, and overall prevail-
ing reservoir conditions [61]. Fig. 4 presents a simple workflow to
Mediterranean Sea the methods applied in this work. After well log data review, the
o / basic reservoir properties including clay volume, porosity, water
31 00
saturation, lithology, Net/Gross are calculated. Table 2 presents
the basic equations used in calculating the typical reservoir charac-
Khalada
Salam Field teristics from well log records. To quantify diagenesis, the D-
N. Ras Qattara
o Field coefficient is developed to be related to the key reservoir parame-
/
30 30 Razzak Fields ters and log measurements sensitive to the prevailing diagenesis
process such as cementation factor, porosity, resistivity logs, and
saturating fluids resistivity. To accomplish such a relationship,
o /
Pickett plot [62] is constructed to get an estimate to the Archie
30 00 parameters, particularly the cementation factor ‘m’. To avoid irrel-
0 50 km
evant data points that may induce erroneous results, the dataset
with effective porosity less than 0.1% are filtered out. The Archie
o / o / o /
27 00 28 00 28 00 parameters from Pickett plot is further checked for accuracy
assessment using 3-D regression according to Eqs. (5)–(9).
The Picket plot technique can be mathematically represented as
a function of the log measurements ‘Sw, Rw/Rt, and £’ by Eq. (5).
 
NQ-3 Rw
log ¼
loga þ m  log£ þ n  logSw ð5Þ
SM-3 Rt

where Rw is the formation water resistivity, Rt is the true resistivity,

SM-2 NQ-1 Sw is the water saturation, and £ is the porosity.
To simplify Eq. (5), the parameters are substituted by symbols;
SM-1 NQ-2 Log (Rw/Rt) by ‘Z’, Log (£) by ‘X’, Log (Sw) by ‘Y’, and log a by ‘A’.
Consequently Eq. (5) can be rewritten as presented in Eq. (6).

Z ¼
A þ mX þ nY ð6Þ
The X, Y, and Z parameters are well logs dependent, while the
Fig. 2. Location map to the studied wells and fields within their concessions in the
Western Desert. unknown Archie parameters ‘log
1 A, m, and n’ can be obtained
by constructing 3 different equations at various measurement
potential (SP), Gamma ray (GR), bulk density (RHOB), photoelectric points (N) through the well records (Eqs. (7)–(9)) using the 3D
effect (PEF), Neutron porosity (NPHIE), deep resistivity (LLD), and regression method describe by Mohamad and Hamada [67]. Using
micro-spherical focused log (MSFL). Gamma ray measurements of the various measurement points (N), Eq. (6) can be represented as
core samples from the four formations are gathered to be Eq. (7) while Eqs. (8) and (9) can be obtained through multiplying
P P
integrated in depth matching. Depth matching for log-core correla- Eq. (7) by Xi and Yi, respectively.

Table 1
Core, well logs, and well data for the studied 12 wells from four different fields located in the Western Desert, Egypt.

Field Wells Lat. (N) Long. (E) Log interval (ft) Available Logs Core depth (ft)
From To From To
0 00 0 00
ERZK ER-1 30° 33 45.80 28° 32 53.64 3462.5 3638.0 GR, SP, Neutron, Density, Deep Resistivity, Shallow Resistivity, MSFL 3530.4 3649.6
ER-2 30° 330 54.1200 28° 330 09.9700 3462.0 3858.5
ER-3 30° 340 7.1200 28° 330 12.5100 3562.0 3858.0
SALAM SM-1 30° 420 3.6000 26° 570 28.0800 5408.0 5737.0 GR, SP, Neutron, Density, Deep Resistivity, Shallow Resistivity, MSFL 5540.0 5611.5
SM-2 30° 420 14.0400 26° 850 10.9200 5458.0 5801.0
SM-3 30° 420 33.0400 26° 570 42.0900 5814.5 5837.8
NRQ NQ-1 30° 250 35.7600 28° 510 27.7700 7611.0 7632 GR, SP, Neutron, Density, Deep Resistivity, Shallow Resistivity, MSFL 7766.0 7797.5
NQ-2 30° 250 39.7200 28° 510 9.1500 7655.3 7674.8
NQ-3 30°250 42.1800 28° 510 45.1200 7794.0 7808.0
NRZK NR-4 30° 330 38.6800 28° 260 45.8900 7911.0 8038.3 GR, SP, Neutron, Density, Deep Resistivity, Shallow Resistivity, MSFL 7906.0 7993.0
NR-5 30° 330 31.2600 28° 260 32.1300 7904.0 9012.0
NR-6 30° 330 34.6600 28° 260 11.9000 7952.3 8081.3

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx 5

GR, API Extracting reservoir characteristics using Tech.log.

100 80 60 40 20 0 Using Pickett plot to get Archie parameters and confirm m
7900 parameter by 3-D regression.

Calculating Diagenesis coefficient.

7910
Applying relative importance index to determine the most
effective parameters to feed ANN.

Splitting the data into training and testing data

7920

Constructing the ANN

7930

Training ANN model

7940
Evaluating ANN Performance

7950
Depth , Ft

Performance
No
Accepted

7960
Yes

Diagenesis coefficient prediction

7970

End

7980
Fig. 4. A flow chart to the methodology.

7990

Table 2
A list of the mathematical equations for the calculations of the important reservoir
properties.

8000 Parameter Equation Reference

 
Shale Volume (Vsh) GRlog
GRmin 3:7IGR [63]
IGR ¼ GRmax
GRmin V sh ¼ 0:083 2
1
Log Data using Gamma ray
log
Core Data    
Density Porosity q
q q
q [64]
£Dcorr ¼ qma
qb
Vsh qma
qsh
(£Dcorr Þ ma f ma f

8010 h  i
Neutron Porosity £Ncorr ¼ £N
£ [64]
0:45  0:30  V sh
Nsh

(£Ncorr Þ
Fig. 3. The depth matching of core (Green) and log (Red) data using Gamma ray Effective Porosity (£E ) £N
D ¼ £Ncorr2:0
þ£Dcorr [65,66]
records in well NR-5.

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
6 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

X X X
Zi ¼
N  A þ m  Xi þ n  Yi ð7Þ Table 3
The simple statistics to the data used to train and validate the ANN.
X X X  2 X Variables Min. Max. Avg. StDev.
ZiXi ¼
A  N  Xi þ m Xi þ n YiXi ð8Þ
GR (API) 6.4 103.4 25.6 14.1
NPHIE (%) 5.4 49.9 17.5 7.0
X X X X 2 PHIE (%) 1.0 34.2 12.5 6.2
ZiYi ¼
A  N Yi þ m  XiYi þ n Yi ð9Þ
SW (%) 6.1 100.0 79.0 29.0
(Swr-Swa) (%)
99.9 99.3 6.3 30.0
Eqs. (7)–(9) can be simultaneously solved using MATLAB to
Diagenesis Coeff. 1.21 9.03 5.4 1.86
obtain a, m, and n values and these results are subsequently com-
pared to the Picket plot results.
Once a reasonable estimate to the cementation factor ‘m’ is
obtained, the quantification of diagenesis can be approached Table 4
through the correlation with various combinations of diagenesis A simple statistical analysis for the key petrophysical results (Sw, /eff, and Vcl) of the
sensitive parameters ‘m, Swr, and Swa’ and pore type in core data. studied wells.

Using try and error approach to quantify D-coefficient within val- Field Well Statistics Sw /eff Vcl
ues falling between 0 and 10, Eq. (10) appears practical to relate ERZK ER-1 Min 40.91 3.38 1.00
the diagenesis sensitive parameters (m, Swr, and Swa) to the D- Max 100.00 34.15 40.17
coefficient (D). Avg 89.70 15.64 11.91
StDev 16.54 5.78 8.40
D ¼ m2 þ mðSwr
Swa Þ ð10Þ ER-2 Min 28.22 4.99 2.00
Max 100.00 33.86 29.90
Represented in well logs parameters and measurements, Eq. Avg 83.80 16.27 8.70
(10) can be rewritten as in Eq. (11), as StDev 21.55 5.61 6.70
ER-3 Min 61.00 2.89 0.00
 0:625  0:5 ! Max 100.00 29.78 78.00
Rlls =Rlld Rw
D ¼ m2 þ
ð11Þ Avg 98.60 11.58 19.50
Rmf =Rw Rlld  £2 StDev 5.59 4.13 14.10
SALAM SM-1 Min 34.42 4.60 0.00
where Rlls is the shallow resistivity, Rlld is the deep resistivity, Rmf is Max 100.00 26.77 54.00
the mud filtrate resistivity. Avg 86.70 10.87 36.80
To facilitate calculating the diagenesis coefficient (D), Feedfor- StDev 16.40 4.84 21.00
SM-2 Min 34.42 4.60 0.45
ward backpropagation ANN has been developed to relate the ‘D’
Max 100.00 26.77 89.00
to the direct well log measurements (Fig. 4). To accomplish this, Avg 86.70 10.87 30.00
the available log measurements are correlated to the calculated StDev 16.43 4.85 14.90
‘D’ coefficient from Eq. (11) using the relative importance algo- SM-3 Min 38.00 5.00 0.00
rithm of Microsoft Excel [68] to determine the most sensitive Max 100.00 30.12 70.90
Avg 20.14 11.22 31.40
parameters. Fig. 5 shows the calculated relative importance of
StDev 20.14 5.82 20.45
the available log parameters to their corresponding D-coefficient.
NRQ NQ-1 Min 50.21 5.00 0.42
Of the various log measurements (Swr-Swa), NPHI, PHIE, Sw, and
Max 100.00 30.12 66.10
Gamma ray appear highly correlated to the calculated D- Avg 92.94 11.21 18.80
coefficient. The LLS and LLD logs are neglected for being well rep- StDev 9.81 5.82 16.20
resented at (Swr-Swa). Table 3 presents simple statistics for the NQ-2 Min 50.21 12.85 0.83
Max 100.00 29.97 16.98
dataset used for ANN construction. A total 3077 measurements
Avg 92.94 25.70 8.09
have been used to construct the ANN with 70% (2156) randomly StDev 9.81 3.95 5.15
selected for training and verification and the remaining 30% NQ-3 Min 35.67 11.65 0.46
(921) are kept for ANN testing. ANN training involves testing var- Max 100.00 27.93 23.84
ious hidden layers configurations, different numbers of neutrons Avg 64.84 23.43 7.90
StDev 18.23 3.36 6.70
NRZK NR-4 Min 7.59 1.60 0.10
Max 100.00 31.95 31.87
1
Avg 37.13 37.13 1.97
StDev 34.40 6.60 4.64
0.8 NR-5 Min 11.16 1.03 1.08
Max 100.00 11.41 72.60
0.6 Avg. 59.59 5.00 6.04
StDev 21.02 1.89 5.13
NR-6 Min 6.09 1.02 0.80
0.4
Max 100.00 20.68 33.40
Avg. 65.55 10.21 2.72
0.2 StDev 38.52 3.42 3.20

0
for each layer, and numerous types of activation function. In addi-
tion, several learning techniques that modify the weights and bias
-0.2
of individual input variables are tested to help establishing a stable
calculation system. The optimum ANN structure is determined
-0.4
based on the optimum correlation between ANN-predicted D-
-0.6 coefficient and the diagenesis coefficient ‘D’ calculated from Eq.
(11). Finally, the developed ANN structure is tested with the
Fig. 5. The relative importance indices of the log measurements relative to the remaining 30% of the total data to assure the performance of
calculated D-coefficients for ANN development. ANN prediction through comparing ANN output with actual target

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx 7

‘D’. The performance and development of ANN is evaluated using
the technique describe by Abdulaziz et al. [55]. All well log calcu-
lations and interpretation are completed using Techlog 2015.3
software [69], and ANN construction and prediction management,
together with the 3D regression are accomplished using MATLAB
2016b [70].
5. Results and discussion
To ensure covering a wide variety of carbonate unites within
various depositional and diagenetic history, core and log data from
four producing formations in four different fields are investigated
in details to quantify carbonate diagenesis. The available well logs
and the core data are petrophysically evaluated to determine the
key reservoir parameters in the studied fields and simple statistics
for these results is presented in Table 4. Fig. 6 presents the detailed
petrophysical interpretation in the Alamein dolomite and Apollo-
nia limestone as an example to the main litho-facies identified in
the studied logs. Core analysis indicated that the Alamein dolomite
(NRZK field) is commonly rich with intercrystalline and vuggy
porosity while AR-G dolomite (NRQ field) dominantly has inter-
crystalline porosity. Apollonia and AR-G limestone of respectively
ERZK and Salam fields showed dominant matrix and intercrys-
talline porosity with frequent channel and/or fracture porosity.
Alternatively, core data analysis indicated several diagenetic fea-
tures predominated the lithofacies of the carbonate units in the
studied fields. In NRQ field dolomitization and recrystallization
are common while recrystallization, cementation and compaction
have predominated the diagenesis of the ERZK field. However, dis-
solution, compaction, and cementation are the common diagenetic
features developed within the Salam field but in NRZK field
dolomitization, cementation and dissolution have prevailed the

NR 5
STRATEGPAPHY

GR/Baseline PHIT_ND VDol

Reference VSH_GR PHIT_ND Swr
0 1 0.3 0 0 VLime
(FT) V/V V/V 1
GR PHIT_ND Swa VSH_GR
1:480 0 0
0 gapl 150 0.3 V/V V/V 1

8000
ALAMEIN

8100

ER 2
VSH_GR_Z
Stratigraphy

0 V/V 1
PHIT SWR VLime
Reference GR PHIT SW
VSH_GR2
0 gapi 150 0.3 V/V 0 0 V/V 1

3500
Apollonia

3600

Fig. 6. An example to petrophysical analysis and interpretation in the Alamein dolomite and Apollonia limestone.

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
8 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fracture and intercrystaliine porosity, NRQ Field Matrix porosity, Salam Field

Intercrystalline Dolomitization, NRZK Fields Vuggy dissolution , NRZK Field

Channel/Fracture, Salam Field Dissolution effect, ERZK Field

Fig. 7. The common pore types and dominant diagenesis in the studied core samples.

2.8

2.6 R² = 0.9929

2.4
m-3D regression

2.2

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2
2.7 2.5 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.3
m-Pickett plot

Fig. 8. A cross plot showing the correlation of m-exponent from Pickett plot and the 3D regression of well log data.

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx 9

diagenetic processes. Fig. 7 shows examples to the common poros-
ity and dominant diagenesis identified in the thin section of the
available cores.
Log data analysis of the 12 wells in the studied fields indicated
that the effective porosity reported the minimum values falling
between 1.02% in well NR-6 and 12.85% in well NQ-2 with average
values between 5.0% in well NR-5 and 37.13% in well NR-4 indicat-
ing good porosity (Table 4). The maximum reported effective
porosity falls between 11.41% in NR-5 and 34.15% in well ER-1
with the standard deviation between 1.89% in well NR-5 and
6.60% in well NR-4 demonstrating a relatively moderate-to-high
heterogeneity that characterize typical carbonate sediments
(Table 4). However, the calculated volume of clay showed a wide
range of values with the minimum values between 0.0% in well
SM-1 and 2.0% in well ER-2 and the average values between
1.97% in NR-4 and 36.8% in well SM-1 (Table 4). The studied wells
showed relatively inconsistent statistics as the maximum Vsh val-
ues fall between 16.98% in well NQ-2 and 89.0% in well SM-2 and
the standard deviation varied between 3.2% in well NR-6 and 21%
in well SM-1. Likewise, water saturation calculations showed divi-
sive estimates that reported minimum values falling between 6.09
in well NR-6 and 60% in well ER-3 and the maximum values of
100% of all the studied wells (Table 4). Also the average Sw values,
between 20.14% in well SM-3 and 98.6 in well ER-3, follows the
same pattern that clearly confirm the wide range of standard devi-
ation in the different wells, from 5.59 in well ER-3 to 38.52 in well
NR-6, designating different fluid content of numerous saturation
(Table 4). Such values of petrophysical properties represent consid-
erable variations among the studied intervals that were cautiously
selected to comprise the numerous carbonate environments and
correlation between the ‘m’ parameter from the Pickett plot and
3D regression technique, which increase the confidence in the
‘m’ parameter to be used in further calculations. Table 5 presents
simple statistics to the Archie parameters determined by the Pick-
ett plot technique together with the cementation factor calculated
by the 3D regression log data (Eqs. (7)–(9)). The tortuosity param-
eter ‘a’ falls between 0.3 in well ER-2 and 0.65 in most wells but
may approach 2.9 as in well ER-2 known with the development
numerous porosity types; dissolution, intercrystalline, matrix,
and others (Table 5 and Fig. 7). The average ‘a’ values in the studied
wells typically fall close to 0.48 but may reach 1.37 as reported in
well ER-2. The StDev of the tortuosity parameter ‘a’ reflects the
reservoir heterogeneity that also correspond to the development
of various types of carbonate porosity associating complex deposi-
tional and diagenetic history. For example, in wells ER-2 and SM-3
with various types of carbonate porosity the StDev of the ‘a’ param-
eter falls respectively between 0.76 and 0.56, but in wells NQ-2
and NR-5 with relatively simple pore types the corresponding ‘a’
StDev falls respectively between 0.1 and 0.07. The saturation expo-
nent ‘n’ follows a similar pattern to the tortuosity parameter ‘a’
(Table 5) with a range of values between 1.5 (well ER-2) and 2.6
(well SM-2) and StDev of 0.30. Alternatively, the cementation fac-
tor ‘m’ showed a relatively different pattern as the reported statis-
tical parameters in most wells appear relatively similar except for
the StDev that appears strongly sensitive to the developed porosity
types and reservoir heterogeneity (Table 5). Generally, the mini-
Table 6
The relationship of the D-coefficient and the dominant diagenesis identified in the
studied reservoirs.

diagenesis with various complexity. Parameters Type

Cementation factor is the important and representative term Network Type Feed-Forward Backpropagation
among the Archie parameters [71,72] and therefore was estimated Training Algorithm Levenberg-Marquardt
using two different techniques; Pickett plot and the 3D regression. Training Function TRAINGDM
Fig. 8 shows a successful 3D regression of log data to derive an esti- Adaptation Learning Function LEARNGDM
Performance Properties MSE
mate to the cementation factor ‘m’. This is indicated by the good

Table 5
The simple statistics to Archie parameters from Pickett plot compared with the ‘m-parameter’ calculated by the 3D regression of well log data.

Field Wells Porosity types Statistics Pickett Plot 3-D Regression

a m n m-Regression
ERZK ER-2 Matrix Min 0.3 1.65 1.5 1.721
Intercryst. Max 2.9 2.7 2.35 2.656
Vuggy Avg 1.37 2.13 1.97 2.15
Fracture StDev 0.76 0.31 0.27 0.30
Channel
SALAM SM-2 Matrix Min 0.35 1.65 1.65 1.69
Intercryst. Max 2.1 2.5 2.6 2.52
Vuggy Avg 1.06 1.99 1.93 2.04
Fracture StDev 0.56 0.28 0.27 0.29
Channel
NRQ NRQ-2 Matrix Min 0.4 2.2 1.55 2.187
Intercryst. Max 0.65 2.35 1.85 2.37
Avg 0.48 2.25 1.75 2.251
StDev 0.10 0.07 0.14 0.09
NRZK NR-5 Vuggy Min 0.30 2.25 1.65 2.27
Intercryst. Max 0.65 2.65 2.60 2.67
Avg 0.46 2.51 1.98 2.56
StDev 0.07 0.15 0.40 0.16
Overall Statistics – Min 0.3 1.65 1.5 1.69
Max 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.67
Avg 1.03 2.20 1.95 2.23
StDev 0.32 0.32 0.30 0.32
Correlation coefficient a-m Correlation:
84.98
a-n Correlation:
27.93
m-n Correlation: 25.17
mPick-mReg. Correlation: 98.66

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
 10
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative

Table 7
The weights and bias for the individual layers of the FFBP Neural Network for the prediction of the diagenesis coefficient in carbonate rocks.

Weights to the Neurons of the Input Layer Bias

GR PhiN PhiE Sw Swr-Swa

2.4408
3.7969
1.0164
0.7615
0.1195 5.3101
1.4297 1.9501 3.0723 0.6431
2.9925
4.6595

1.8626 1.4695 1.8496
3.6508 0.2922 4.3034
2.6585
1.7442
3.0731
2.1583 1.0135
3.6384
1.5663 3.1087
2.6583
1.7380 1.3162
3.1126

2.7797
2.5280 2.2525 2.0759 1.8808 2.2989
2.3486
2.7503
1.1374
1.8832 2.7696
1.8623
1.9190
2.7158 2.4080
1.8113
2.3362
1.2653

A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
2.4909 2.7805 2.3608 2.5550 0.2103
0.5750
2.5617
2.0871 0.0150
0.4969
3.4812
0.8882

1.4241
2.8509
0.1290 3.2603 2.3771
0.0020

1.1141
1.2349 2.8458 1.3221
3.6868
1.3657

2.8626 2.3339
2.0348 0.4376 2.7033
1.4135

2.6922 2.4697 0.9235 1.2834 3.4015
1.7132
0.7131 1.5438 2.3536
0.6224 3.7618 2.2714

1.0322
2.8659 1.3464 2.8065
2.1498
3.4488

1.7078 1.2037 2.6488
0.6639 4.0412
2.9775

1.2729
2.4546 1.5582 4.0110 1.2848
3.7725

0.0456 1.3391 1.5304 4.5735 0.0849 4.6468
1.2619 3.0864 1.017 3 0.3607
1.5067 5.1373

A simple statistics for the weights and bias of the input layer parameters
Statistics GR PhiN PhiE Sw (Swr-Swa) Bias
Min
0.0456 1.2037 0.015
0.4969 0.0849
0.002
Max 2.6585
3.7969
3.0731 4.5735 4.0412 5.3101
Avg
0.1142
0.1872 0.7956 0.4771 0.4432
0.3363
StDev 2.01102 2.475 1.9488 2.2409 2.4481 3.2077

Weights to the Neurons of the Hidden Layer Bias

iw(2,1) iw(2,2) iw(2,3) iw(2,4) iw(2,5) iw(2,6) iw(2,7) iw(2,8) iw(2,9) iw(2,10) iw(2,11) iw(2,12) iw(2,13) iw(2,14) iw(2,15) iw(2,16) iw(2,17) iw(2,18) iw(2,19) iw(2,20)

0.9244
1.0553
1.0339
0.2172 0.8598
1.9459 1.0424 0.8815
1.8031
1.4636 2.1898 0.8995
1.1051 0.4589 1.8191
2.2609 1.7615
2.0419 0.8966 0.9355 4.1301
2.2002
1.5356 0.0391 0.1490
0.1483
2.7007
0.3379
1.6286
1.1377
0.8573 0.7131
1.7616 0.0211 0.0347
0.0020 2.3994 2.0807
1.0003 2.1151 0.0958
2.4982
2.2697 1.5983
1.2476
0.4884
1.7476
1.9219
2.0958
1.4642 0.4156 1.1038 0.4709
1.0470 1.0814
0.6516
1.1508
1.5787
0.4886 1.8808 1.3679 0.8155 0.1548
2.1658
0.2398 2.1291
1.4694 0.6440
1.0809 1.2418 0.7556 0.6363
1.5274 1.1808 0.3338
1.6459
2.0867 1.0800 1.5888
1.9618
2.2356 0.5305 0.9545
0.1954
0.6443 1.1978
2.0716 0.2685
0.1747
0.5578 1.0270
1.6777
1.8093
0.3288 1.2616
1.7832
2.0832
0.5912
1.7593
1.6295
1.5006 1.9771 1.2516 1.1592 3.7339

1.1045
1.3388 0.8014
0.4648 1.8844 1.6865 1.5614
1.4445
0.3203
1.0721 1.7744
2.5853 0.9400 0.7233 1.4366 1.5501 2.1531 0.0787 1.0624 0.6549
4.9670

1.0401
1.9436 1.0813
1.0429
0.8330
1.2220
0.7691 2.0802 2.4808 0.4826
0.5328
2.4639 0.4277
1.6968 0.7938 1.6005 0.0350 2.3421
0.4442 0.6805
0.0474
2.6418
1.7277 1.2993 0.5406
1.4394 0.6856 2.3927
1.2097 1.7056
0.2831
1.4918 0.7175 1.2646 0.0868
0.8066
1.7244 2.2999 0.5661 0.3140 0.9023 1.3692
Weights to the Neurons of the Output layer Bias
iw(3,1) iw(3,2) iw(3,3) iw(3,4) iw(3,5) iw(3,6) iw(3,7) iw(3,8)
1.0349 0.5496
1.3193
0.9768 0.2622 1.2614 0.7884
1.1502 0.7199
 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx 11

mum ‘m’ values fall between 1.65 in most wells and 2.25 in well
NR-5 and the maximum values are between 2.35 in well NRQ-4A
and 2.7 in well ER-2. The average reported ‘m’ parameters span
between 1.99 in well SM-2 and 2.51 in well NR-5 as commonly
reported in most carbonate rocks [73,29]. The StDev calculated
for the ‘m’ parameter is comparable in both ERZK and Salam fields
(~0.30) that develop similar pore types but reported only 0.07 in
the NRQ field known to have simple and consistent pore types,
matrix and intercrystalline. However, the ‘m’ StDev is almost
duplicated this value in NRZK field (0.15 in well NR-5) despite
the development of simple pore types, intercrystalline and vuggy
(Fig. 5). This is probably due to the extreme difference in the char-
acteristics of vuggy pores dominated the NRZK field relative to the
other intercrystalline pores.
To quantify the diagenesis in the carbonate rocks, and relating
their values to the known diagenetic processes, the D-coefficient
is calculated using Eq. (10) or (11). The calculated D-coefficient val-
ues fall between 0 and 10 and subsequently compared to the com-
mon pore types and dominant diagenesis processes. It will be more
convenient to directly relate the D-coefficient to log measurements
and log-derived parameters using ANN rather than using the
cementation factor ‘m’ as the main input parameter. The optimum
ANN structure that achieved the best performance comprises three
layers; the input, hidden and output layers. The input layer uses
the effective parameters with the highest correlation (Table 3)
and comprised 20 neurons. The hidden layer involves 8 neurons
while the output layer has only one neuron. Table 6 lists the opti-
mum ANN properties for D-coefficient prediction from well log
data, while Table 7 shows the weights and bias of neurons and
individual layers of the developed ANN. Mathematically, Eq. (12)
presents the calculation framework of the ANN engine.
X
k¼20 X
j¼8
1
DðiÞ ¼ W oiði;kÞ  X pðkÞ þ bði;kÞ þ ðW ohði;jÞ  P Þ

W hiðj;kÞ X PðkÞ
k¼1 j¼1 1þe k¼1
þ bði;jÞ þ bðj;kÞ ð12Þ
where Woi(i,k) is weight for the input neuron, Xp(k) is input parame-
ter, b(i,k) is the bias of the input layer, Woh(i,j) is the weight of the
hidden node, Whi(j,k) is the weight for the output neuron, b(i,j) is
the bias for the hidden layer, and b(j,k) is the bias for the output
layer.
Among the input parameters PhiE, Sw and (Swr-Swa) had the
highest weights with an average value of 0.7956, 0.4432, and
0.3363 respectively. The other log parameters showed a relatively
different average weights, PhiN: 0.1872 and GR:
0.1142 (Table 7).
In addition, the variations among the 20 neurons are relatively
consistent and falls between 2.0 and 2.4 (Table 7). Teaching ANN
using five data records including Gamma ray, /N, /E, Sw, and (Swr
- Swa) from the four wells with core data is considered acceptable,
as the correlation coefficient between the ANN predicted D-
coefficient and the calculated D-coefficient exceeds 0.95. Fig. 9
shows a snapshot to the calculated Mean Square Error calculated
for training, validation, and testing ANN (optimum
MSE = 0.2597). Monitoring the correlation between the ANN pre-
diction and the target D-coefficient through ANN training, valida-
tion and testing is gathered in Fig. 10 with correlation
coefficients between 0.9556 in testing and 0.9744 in training. Once
ANN is successfully tested, the diagenesis coefficients for all the
studied wells with only well log data are predicted and subse-
quently compared to the calculated D-coefficients using Eq. (11)
(Fig. 11). Table 8 lists the dominant diagenesis processes in three
categories with each category falling within a definite range of

Fig. 9. The performance of ANN development through training, validation, and testing.

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
12 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 10. Correlation of ANN outputs and target values through training, validation, and testing of ANN.

D-coefficients, cementation factor, and (Swr-Swa). Comparing the
predicted D-coefficient to both pore types and the prevailing diage-
nesis in the core samples indicated that fracture and compaction
diagenesis prevailed the studies samples with D-coefficient less
than four, while dolomitization dominated the samples with
D-coefficients falling between 4 and 6.5 (Table 8 and Fig. 12).
Alternatively, dissolution with the vuggy pores are the common
diagenesis among the samples with D-coefficient greater than 6.5
(Table 8 and Fig. 12). The fracture/compaction diagenesis data
points typically comprise the matrix and fracture porosity and
most data have D-exponent falling between 2 and 3 that corre-
spond to cementation factor less than ‘1.9’ and (Swr-Swa) less than
‘
2’ (Table 8). However, the intercrystalline porosity associating
the dolomitization diagenesis reported most D-coefficients around
5 with cementation factor between ‘1.95’ and ‘2.46’ and (Swr-Swa)
from ‘
2’ to ‘2’. Instead, vuggy/channel porosity developed by dis-
solution diagenesis reported most D-coefficients within7-8 with
cementation factor exceeding ‘2.5’ and (Swr-Swa) greater than ‘2’
(Table 8 and Fig. 12). These results indicate a direct numerical
relationship between the pore size/type and the calculated
D-coefficient, cementation factor, and (Swr-Swa) that proved
efficient in characterizing the pore pattern and diagenesis process
prevailing the carbonate reservoirs from well log data.
6. Conclusion
The present study develops an innovative technique using well
logs and core data to quantify the diagenesis in carbonate rocks
and relating the obtained values to the dominant pore type and
the prevailing diagenesis. Core data is integrated to well logs from
four different fields in the Western Desert, Egypt to develop an
empirical formula to calculate the D-coefficient, the quantified dia-
genesis. This empirical formula uses the cementation factor ‘m’,
Swr, and Swa and subsequently an ANN with FFBP is developed to
facilitate the prediction of the D-coefficient from Gamma Ray,
porosity, and Sw measurements. The results indicated that
compaction/Fracture diagenesis prevails the sediments with
D-coefficients less than 4, while dolomitization is the common dia-
genesis in units with D- coefficients between 4 and 6.5. Dissolution
is the dominant diagenesis in carbonates with the D- coefficients
greater than 6.5. These results indicate that the proposed
techniques could be powerful to characterize the dominant pore

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx 13

10

9
R² = 0.9522

ANN Predicted Diagenesis Coefficient

8

0
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Calculated Diagenesis Coefficent

Fig. 11. Correlation of the ANN-prediction and the target diagenesis coefficient of the studied data.

Table 8
The dominant diagenesis falling within a definite range of D-coefficients.

Parameters Cementation factor Swr- Swa Diagenesis coefficient (D) Diagenesis type
Ranges (1.30 < m < 1.90) (
0.2  (swr-swa)) (1.3 < D < 3.8) Compaction/stylolite
(1.95 < m < 2.46) (
0.2  (swr-swa)  0.2) (3.9 < D < 6.5) Dolomatization/Recrystallization
(2.50 < m < 3.30) (0.2  (Swr- swa)) (6.5 < D < 10.0) Dissolution

Fracture/Compacon Dolomazaon Dissoluon

No. of points

Diagenesis Coefficient

Fig. 12. A histogram showing the number of data points of each diagenesis type and the corresponding D-coefficient.

types and the prevailing diagenesis in carbonate reservoirs using pany for providing the dataset from their fields in the Western
well log data. Desert.

References
Acknowledgement
[1] Ahr WM. Geology of carbonate reservoirs: the identification, description, and
The authors very much acknowledge the approval of the Egyp- characterization of hydrocarbon reservoirs in carbonate rocks, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., ISBN:9780470164914, doi: 10.1002/9780470370650.
tian General Petroleum Corporation to use their data to complete [2] Li J, Peng X, Bai Sh, Chen Z, Van Nostrand JD. Biogeochemical processes
this work. A special appreciation goes to Khalda Petroleum Com- controlling authigenic carbonate formation within the sediment column from

Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
14 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
the Okinawa Trough. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 2018;222:363–82. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2017.10.029.
[3] Steiner Z, Lazar B, Reimers CE, Erez J. Carbonates dissolution and precipitation
in hemipelagic sediments overlaid by supersaturated bottom-waters – Gulf of
Aqaba, Red Sea. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 2019;246:565–80. doi: https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.gca.2018.12.007.
[4] Tucker ME, Wright VP. Carbonate sedimentology. Blackwell, Oxf. 482:1990.
[5] Fairchild IJ, Knoll AH, Swett K. Coastal lithofacies and biofacies associated with
syndepositional dolomitization and silicification (Draken Formation, Upper
Riphean, Svalbard). Precambr Res 1991;53(3–4):165–97. doi: https://doi.org/
10.1016/0301-9268(91)90071-H.
[6] Pomar L, Haq B. Decoding depositional sequences in carbonate systems:
concepts vs experience. Global Planet Change 2016;146:190–225. doi: https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2016.10.001.
[7] Laya JC, Sulaica J, Teoh CP, Whitaker F, Gabellone T, Tucker ME, et al. Controls
on Neogene carbonate facies and stratigraphic architecture of an isolated
carbonate platform – the Caribbean island of Bonaire. Mar Pet Geol
2018;94:1–18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2018.03.031.
[8] Guo C, Chen D, Song Y, Zhou X, Ding Y, Zhang G. Depositional environments
and cyclicity of the Early Ordovician carbonate ramp in the western Tarim
Basin (NW China). J Asian Earth Sci 2018;158:29–48. doi: https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jseaes.2018.02.006.
[9] Shen J-W, Xu H-L. Microbial carbonates as contributors to Upper Permian
(Guadalupian–Lopingian) biostromes and reefs in carbonate platform margin
setting, Ziyun County, South China. Palaeogeogr, Palaeoclimatol, Palaeoecol
2005;218(3–4):217–38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2004.12.016.
[10] Heindel K, Foster WJ, Richoz S, Birgel D, Roden VJ, Baud A, et al. The formation
of microbial-metazoan bioherms and biostromes following the latest Permian
mass extinction. Gondwana Res 2018;61:187–202. doi: https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.gr.2018.05.007.
[11] Dyer B, Maloof AC, Purkis SJ, Harris PM. Quantifying the relationship between
water depth and carbonate facies. Sed Geol 2018;373:1–10. doi: https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2018.05.011.
[12] Khalifa MA, Farouk S, Hassan AM. Carbonate platform facies development of
the Turonian Wata Formation in central and eastern Sinai, Egypt. J African
Earth Sci 2016;124:126–38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jafrearsci.2016.09.011.
[13] Ahm A-SC, Bjerrum ChJ, Blättler CL, Swart PK, Higgins JA. Quantifying early
marine diagenesis in shallow-water carbonate sediments, Geochim
Cosmochim Acta 2018;236;140–59. doi: 10.1016/j.gca.2018.02.042.
[14] Higgins JA, Blättler CL, Lundstrom EA, Santiago-Ramos DP, Akhtar AA, Crüger
Ahm A-S, et al. Mineralogy, early marine diagenesis, and the chemistry of
shallow-water carbonate sediments. Geochim Cosmochim Acta
2018;220:512–34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2017.09.046.
[15] Bastesen KE, Corlett H, Eker A, Hirani J, Hollis C, Gawthorpe RL, et al. The
effects of dolomitization on petrophysical properties and fracture distribution
within rift-related carbonates (Hammam Faraun Fault Block, Suez Rift, Egypt).
J Struct Geol 2018;108:108–20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2017.06.005.
[16] Teama MA, Abuhagaza AA, Kassab MA. Integrated petrographical and
petrophysical studies for reservoir characterization of the Middle Jurassic
rocks at Ras El-Abd, Gulf of Suez, Egypt. J African Earth Sci 2019. doi: https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2019.01.009 [in press].
[17] Lucia FJ. Carbonate reservoir characterization, xii + 226 p., Berl., Heidelb., New
York, Barc., Bp., Hong Kong; 1999.
[18] Choquette PW, Pray LC. Geologic Nomenclature and classification of porosity
in sedimentary carbonates. Am Assoc Petrol Geol Bul 1970;54(2):207–50. ,
https://www.scribd.com/document/240821517/Choquette-Pray-1970.
[19] Folk RL. Petrology of sedimentary rocks, Hemphill; 1965. <https://web.archive.
org/web/20110325125226/http://www.lib.utexas.edu/geo/folkready/>.
[20] Bathurst RGC. In: Carbonate sediments and their diagenesis. Elsevier Science
Publ. Co.; 1975. p. 660.
[21] Fairbridge RW. Chapter 8 Carbonate rocks and paleoclimatology in the biogeo-
chemical history of the planet. Dev Sedimentol 1967;9(A):399–432. https://
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0070457108711166.
[22] Longman M. Carbonate diagenetic textures from nearsurface diagenetic
environments. AAPG Bull 1980;64:4(4). doi: https://doi.org/10.1306/
2F918A63-16CE-11D7-8645000102C1865D.
[23] Wu J, Fan T, Gao Z, Yin X, Fan X, Li C, et al. A conceptual model to investigate
the impact of diagenesis and residual bitumen on the characteristics of
Ordovician carbonate cap rock from Tarim Basin, China. J Petrol Sci Eng
2018;168:226–45. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.05.034.
[24] Wolf KH, Chilingarian GV. Diagenesis of sandstones and compaction, in
Compaction of Coarse-Grained Sediments, vol. II, Development in
Sedimentology, vol. 18b, edited by G. V. Chilingarian and K. H. Wolf,
Elsevier, New York; 1976. p. 69–444.
[25] Alsharhan AS, Kendall CG. Facies variation, depositional setting and
hydrocarbon potential of the Upper Cretaceous rocks in the United Arab
Emirates. Cretac Res 1995;16(4):435–49. , https://www.sciencedirect.
com/science/article/pii/S0195667185710300.
[26] Javanbakht M, Wanas HA, Jafarian A, Shahsavan N, Sahraeyan M. Carbonate
diagenesis in the Barremian-Aptian Tirgan Formation (Kopet-Dagh Basin, NE
Iran): petrographic, geochemical and reservoir quality constraints. J Afr Earth
Sc 2018;144:122–35.
[27] Nader FH. Petrographic and geochemical study of the Kesrouane Formation
(Jurassic), Mount Lebanon: implications on dolomitization and petroleum
geology. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven 2003:386.
Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
[28] Sibley DF, Gregg JM. Classification of dolomite rock textures. J Sediment Res
1987;57:967–75. doi: https://doi.org/10.1306/212F8CBA-2B24-11D7-
8648000102C1865D.
[29] Nabawy BS. Impacts of the pore- and petro-fabrics on porosity exponent and
lithology factor of Archie’s equation for carbonate rocks. J Afr Earth Sc
2015;108:101–14.
[30] Liu J, Dong S, Zhang L, Ma Q, Wu C. Estimation of Archie parameters by a novel
hybrid optimization algorithm. J Petrol Sci Eng 2015;135:232–9.
[31] Nazemi M, Tavakoli V, Sharifi-Yazdi M, Rahimpour-Bonab H, Hosseini M. The
impact of micro-to macro-scale geological attributes on Archie’s exponents,
example from Permian-Triassic carbonate reservoirs of the central Persian
Gulf. Mar Pet Geol 2019 [in press].
[32] Reeder RJ, Wenk HR. Structure refinements of some thermally disordered
dolomites. Am Mineral 1983;68(7–8):769–76.
[33] Al-Suwaidi AS, Aziz SK. Sequence stratigraphy of Oxfordian and
Kimmeridgian shelf carbonate reservoirs, offshore Abu Dhabi. GeoArabia
2002;7(1):31–44.
[34] Nader FH, Swennen R. The hydrocarbon potential of Lebanon: new insights
from regional correlations and studies of Jurassic dolomitization. J Pet Geol
2004;27(3):253–75.
[35] Roure F, Swennen R, Schneider F, Faure JL, Ferket H, Guilhaumou N, et al.
Incidence and importance of tectonics and natural fluid migration on reservoir
evolution in foreland fold-and-thrust belts. Oil Gas Sci Technol (OGST)
2005;60(1):67–106.
[36] Cantrell DL, Swart PK, Hagerty RM. Genesis and characterization of dolomite,
Arab-D Reservoir, Ghawar Field, Saudi Arabia. GeoArabia 2004;9(2):11–36.
[37] Nader FH, Swennen R, Keppens E. Calcitization/dedolomitization of Jurassic
dolostones (Lebanon): results from petrographic and sequential geochemical
analyses. Sedimentology 2008;55:1467–85. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1365-3091.2008.00953.x.
[38] Ibrahim MM, Abdulaziz AM, Fattah KA. Rejuvenation of a mature field through
STOIIP validation using an integrated 3D geo-cellular dynamic model for a
heterogeneous multi layered reservoir. Soc Petrol Eng 2016. doi: https://doi.
org/10.2118/183565-MS.
[39] Machel HG. Concepts and models of dolomitization: a critical reappraisal. In:
Braithwaite CJR, Rizzi G, Darke G, editors. The geometry and petrogenesis of
dolomite hydrocarbon reservoirs: London, Geological society of London.
Special Publications 2004;235:7–63.
[40] Ibrahim MM, Abdulaziz AM, Fattah KA. STOIIP validation for a heterogeneous
multi-layered reservoir of a mature field using an integrated 3D geo-cellular
dynamic model. Egypt J Pet 2018;27(4):887–96. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ejpe.2018.01.004.
[41] Jirjees AY, Abdulaziz AM. Influences of uncertainty in well log petrophysics
and fluid properties on well test interpretation: an application in West Al
Qurna Oil Field, South Iraq. Egypt J Petrol 2019;28(4):383–92. doi: https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2019.08.005.
[42] Kadkhodaie-Ilkhchi R, Rezaee R, Mehdipour V. Unraveling the reservoir
heterogeneity of the tight gas sandstones using the porosity conditioned
facies modeling in the Whicher Range field, Perth Basin, Western Australia. J
Petrol Sci Eng 2019;176:97–115. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
petrol.2019.01.020.
[43] Abdulaziz AM. Microseismic monitoring of the hydraulic-fracture growth and
geometry in the Upper Bahariya member, Khalda concession, Western Desert,
Egypt. J Geophys Eng 2014;4:11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-2132/11/
4/045013.
[44] Choquette PW, James NP. Diagenesis # 12. Diagenesis in Limestones-3. The
deep burial environment. Geosci Can 1987;14:3–35.
[45] Swennen R, Ferket H, Benchilla L, Roure F, Ellam RM. Fluid flow and diagenesis
in carbonate dominated foreland fold-and-thrust belts: petrographic
inferences from field studies of late-diagenetic fabrics from Albania,
Belgium, Canada, Mexico and Pakistan. J Geochem Explor 2003;78–79:481–5.
[46] Salem KG, Abdulaziz AM, Dahab ASA. Prediction of hydraulic properties in
carbonate reservoirs using artificial neural network. Soc Petrol Eng 2018. doi:
https://doi.org/10.2118/193007-MS.
[47] Doligez B, Beucher H, Pontiggia M, Ortenzi A, Mariani A. Comparison of
Methodologies and Geostatistical Approaches for Diagenesis Quantification,
AAPG Convention, Denver, Colorado, 7-10 June; 2009.
[48] Breesch L, Swennen R, Dewever V, Roure F, Vincent B. Diagenesis and fluid
system evolution in the northern Oman Mountains, United Arab Emirates:
Implications for petroleum exploration. GeoArabia 2011;16(2):111–48.
[49] Ronchi P, Jadoul F, Ceriani A, Giulio AD, Scotti P, Ortenzi A, et al. Multistage
Dolomitization in an Early Jurassic Platform (Southern Alps, Italy): insights for
the distribution of massive dolomitized bodies. Sedimentology 2011;58
(2):532–65.
[50] Barbier M, Hamon Y, Doligez B, Callot JP, Floquet M, Daniel JM. Stochastic joint
simulation of facies and diagenesis: a case study on early diagenesis of the
Madison Formation (Wyoming, USA). Oil Gas Sci Technol 2012;67(1):123–46.
[51] Kuznetsova OV, Sevastyanov VS, Timerbaev AR. What are the current
analytical approaches for sediment analysis related to the study of
diagenesis? Highlights from 2010 to 2018. Talanta 2019;191:435–42. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2018.08.080.
[52] Archie GE. The electric resistivity logs as an aid in determining some reservoir
680 characteristics. Trans Am Int Mech Eng 1942;146:54–62.
[53] Paraska DW, Hipseya MR, Salmon SU. Sediment diagenesis models: Review of
approaches, challenges and opportunities. Environ Modell Software
2014;61:297–325. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.05.011.
 A.M. Abdulaziz, S.S. Hawary / Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
[54] Stolper DA, Eiler JM, Higgins JA. Modeling the effects of diagenesis on
carbonate clumped-isotope values in deep- and shallow-water settings.
Geochim Cosmochim Acta 2018;227:264–91. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gca.2018.01.037.
[55] Abdulaziz AM, Mahdi HA, Sayyouh MH. Prediction of reservoir quality using
well logs and seismic attributes analysis with artificial neural network: A case
study from Farrud reservoir, Al-Ghani field, Libya. J Appl Geophys
2019;161:239–54. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2018.09.013.
[56] Anifowose F, Adeniye S, Abdulazeez A. Integrating seismic and log data for
improved petroleum reservoir properties estimation using non-linear feature-
selection based hybrid computational intelligence model. J Petrol Sci Eng
2016;145:230–7.
[57] Said R. The Geology of Egypt, Balkema; 1990. p.734.
[58] Issawi B, Francis MH, Yousef EA, Osman RA. The Phanerozoic Geology of Egypt:
A geodynamic approach. The Egyptian Geological Survey Special Publication
No. 81. Ministry of Petroleum, The Egyptian Mineral Resources Authority,
Abbaseya, Egypt; 2009.
[59] El Zarka MH. Subsurface geology of the Tertiary rocks of the NE district of the
Western Desert of Egypt. J Afr Earth Sc 1986;5:285–319.
[60] Hantar G. North Western Desert. In: Said R. (Ed.), The Geology of Egypt,
Balkema, Chapter 15; 1990, p. 293–319.
[61] Abdulaziz AM, Abouzaid MA, Dahab AS. Petrophysical analysis and flow units
characterization for Abu Madi Pay zones in the nile delta reservoirs. Open J
Geol 2018;8:1146–65.
[62] El-Khadragy AA, Ghorab MA, Shazly TF, Ramadan M, El-Sawy MZ. Using of
Pickett’s plot in determining the reservoir characteristics in Abu Roash
Formation El-Razzak Oil Field, North Western Desert, Egypt. Egypt J Petrol
2014;23(1):45–51. , https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S1110062114000099.
Please cite this article as: A. M. Abdulaziz and S. S. Hawary, Prediction of carbonate diagenesis from well logs using artificial neural network: An innovative
technique to understand complex carbonate systems, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.01.010
15
[63] Bassiouni Z. Theory, measurement and interpretation of well logs. Textbook
Series, Vol. 4, Henry L. Doherty Memorial Fund of AIME, Society of Petroleum
Engineers (SPE), (1994-01-01) (1656); 1994.
[64] Dresser Atlas, log interpretation fundamentals, Dresser atlas division, dresser
industries, Inc. D. OCL C No. 990459766, 1975.
[65] Selley RC. Elements of Petroleum Geology. Academic press, London, United
Kingdom.470p. ISBN-13: 978-0-12-636370-8; 1998.
[66] Asquith G, Krygowski D. Basic well log analysis, 2nd.ed. Sections by Steven
Henderson and Neil Hurleg. The American Association of Petroleum Geologist,
Tulsa, Oklahoma. AAPG. Methods in Exploration series No.16 (2004), ISBN: 0-
89181-667-4. 244p.
[67] Mohamad AM, Hamada GM. Determination techniques of Archie’s parameters:
a, m and n in heterogeneous reservoirs. J Geophys Eng 2017;14(6):1358–67.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-2140/aa805c.
[68] Microsoft, 2017. Microsoft Office, Microsoft Corporation. https://microsoft_
office.en.downloadastro.com/.
[69] Schlumberger, Schlumberger Techlog, Version: 2015.3 Revision 158051; 2015.
http://www.software.slb.com.
[70] Matworks. MATLAB 2016b, Version 11.0; 2016. https://www.mathworks.com/
help/stats/release-notes.html.
[71] Qin Z, Pan H, Ma H, Konaté AA, Luo S. Fast prediction method of Archie’s
cementation exponent. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 2016;34:291–7. doi: https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jngse.2016.06.070.
[72] Shahi M, Salehi MM, Kamari M. New correlation for estimation of cementation
factor in Asmari carbonate rock reservoirs. Egypt J Petrol 2018;27(4):663–9.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2017.10.002.
[73] Hamada GM, El-Farsi NH. Determination of Archie parameters from Omani
carbonate cores. J King Saud Univ – Eng Sci 1994;6(2):281–93. , https://www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1018363918306123/pdfft?md5=49350b09
88fef4b05e7284be25c374f9&pid=1-s2.0-S1018363918306123-main.pdf.