facies identification.

© All Rights Reserved

89 vues

facies identification.

© All Rights Reserved

- SUG243 - Cartography - Data Classification Method
- Soft Computing Quiz
- Multi-Label Classification of Music Into Emotions
- Multilabel Things
- Bayesian Updating 2012
- Bigdata Edu Lecture Slide PDFs W001V005
- Machine Learning
- Boss
- An Evaluation of Machine Learning in Algorithm Selection for Search Problems.pdf
- traffic_identification_engine.pdf
- BayesClassifier Updated
- A quantitative approach to fluvial facies models.pdf
- SCProj.pdf
- Discriminant Analysis
- Lab-11 Random Forest
- Financial Statement Indicators of Financial Failure an Empirical Study on Turkish Public Companies During the November 2000 and February 2001 Crisis - 2009 - Aktan
- FFFF Report
- Safe Keeping Evolution Pattern
- Linear Regression and Load Forecasting
- s2.0-S1877705812008375-main غدا.pdf

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 9

www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

analysis and nave Bayes classifier

Yumei Li , Richard Anderson-Sprecher

University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071-3332, USA

Received 19 March 2005; received in revised form 1 June 2006; accepted 6 June 2006

Abstract

The performance of a nave Bayes classifier is compared with a well-established statistical classification approach, linear

discriminant analysis, by considering core and log data from marineeolian sediments. The results indicate that both methods

perform adequately, and the Gaussian nave Bayes classifier provides estimates as good as those based on the linear discriminant

analysis for the given data set. Quadratic discriminant analysis, a more conventional Bayesian analysis, and kernel-based density

estimation methods perform unexpectedly poor, probably because of overfitting. We conclude that the normal distribution is

appropriate to fit the distribution of log readings in the present data, and the simplifications of nave Bayes provide a robust, simple

approach for facies identification.

2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Facies; Well logs; Discriminant analysis; Nave Bayes classifier

1. Introduction

Facies identification is important in oil exploration

and development because facies often control the variation of petrophysical properties. Identification of

facies is generally based on core samples and outcrop

characteristics. Because available core and outcrop are

usually limited, establishing relationships between

facies and more readily available data sources, in particular well logs, is highly desirable.

Some efforts have been made to use statistical methods such as discriminant analysis (Sakurai and Melvin,

1988; Avseth et al., 2001; Tang et al., 2004) to identify

Corresponding author.

E-mail address: liyumei@uwyo.edu (Y. Li).

0920-4105/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2006.06.001

facies from well logs. The past decade has also seen

applications of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) (Derek

et al., 1990; Wong et al., 1995; Siripitayananon et al.,

2001; Bhatt and Helle, 2002) and fuzzy logic (Cuddy,

2000; Saggaf and Nebrija, 2003) in facies classification.

Initial successes of ANN for facies prediction have

inspired enthusiasm, leading to claims that it has the

potency to dominate or take over other analytical tools

used in the exploration and production industry

(Iloghalu, 2003). However, the reliable use of neural

networks requires experience for adjusting parameters

and a large amount of training time, especially for large

data sets (Wong et al., 1995; Avseth et al., 2001).

All methods use a training data set consisting of

observed cases with full information about both predictors (in our application, well-log readings) and groups

(in our case, facies). Based on the training data set, one

150

observations of predictors can be used to infer probable

group memberships. The ideal classifier would be easy

to implement and would give reliable results. Among

statistical classification methods, discriminant analysis is

robust and powerful (Wong et al., 1995; Avseth et al.,

2001). Like other statistical methods, discriminant analysis does, however, need a large training data set (> 100

cases in the training set). The classification rule maximizes the separation of the pre-defined groups in the

multi-dimensional space formed by variables or predictors in the training set. It is widely accepted that the

success of discriminant analysis depends on the validity

of certain statistical assumptions such as multivariate

normality and homogeneity (Wong et al., 1995).

However, experience shows that the technique is fairly

robust when data size is adequate (at least 20 cases in the

smallest group in the training set) and when there are

relatively few (five or fewer) predictors (Tabachnick and

Fidell, 1996).

Bayesian classifiers provide another alternative. Conceptually, a Bayesian approach to classification is

appealing because it allows one to incorporate known

information or expert opinions, it explicitly leads to probabilities of new cases falling into different classes, and it

is easily updated as new information is obtained.

Multivariate Bayesian analyses are sometimes problematic, however, in that computations may be difficult and

modeling multiple correlations between variables is

potentially both delicate and unwieldy. To take advantage

of positive aspects of the Bayesian approach while avoiding some of the negative aspects, a modified Bayesian

method, known as nave Bayes, is gaining acceptance.

Nave Bayes is easy to implement, and is thus appealing,

provided that it gives good results. At first glance the

approach seems dubious because it assumes independence, and in many settings proper treatment of correlations is known to be important for good inference. For

nave Bayes, however, the impact of this simplification is

often surprisingly small and early experience with nave

Bayes suggests that it may give facies predictions that are

at least as accurate as those from neural networks without

the burden of lengthy training required by neural networks

(Kapur et al., 2000).

Little work has been done on nave Bayes for facies

identification, probably for three reasons: First, the

choice of prior probability distribution can greatly affect

classification results; although prior probabilities are

used in other classification methods, including discriminant analysis, the problem of priors is particularly associated with Bayesian methods. Prior information

originates from local geological knowledge. In hetero-

geneous formations like fluvial deposits, the prior distribution may change from one well to another (Coudert

et al., 1994). The heterogeneity of deposits makes the

choice of prior a challenge. Second, probabilities required by a fully Bayesian method are hard to obtain for

more than one predictor. The nave Bayes classifier

assumes independence among predictors, but well logs

are often dependent. It is not clear whether violation of

the independence assumption will affect the facies classification. Third, it is still unknown what distributions are

appropriate to fit different log readings and how different

distributions affect the facies prediction. Kapur et al.

(2000) discretized values of predictor variables and used

a counting rule to calculate probabilities. They emphasized the importance of picking appropriate bin sizes: If

too few bins are selected, the FOP (facies occurrence

probability) lacks the ability to discriminate between

adjacent log readings. If there are too many bins, the FOP

will not be estimated precisely.

This study evaluates the performance of discriminant

analysis and a normal-based nave Bayes classifier in

facies identification from well logs by applying the logfacies correlation derived from the training set in three

hold out wells.

2. Methodology

2.1. Nave Bayes classifier

Bayes theorem aims to determine the conditional

probability of parameter values given the data by combining expectations based on previous experience (prior

probabilities) with information from available data. In

this study, Bayes theorem is used to calculate the probability of the occurrence of a certain facies given the

well-log readings and to assign the facies of the highest

posterior probability to that observation depth.

The application of Bayes theorem in facies classification can be written as follows:

P fj jX x P fj

PX xj fj

PX x

facies fj given that a random log reading X is equal to x;

P( fj) is the probability of the jth facies obtained from

previous experience or from our initial belief of the

facies distribution before we have observed any data;

and P(X = x| fj) is the conditional probability density for

a random log reading x given the occurrence of the jth

facies fj. P(X = x) is the probability density for a random

predict that a new case X will come from the facies fj

that achieves the highest posterior probability. If there

are n well logs (X1, X2, X3, , Xn), then the above

formula can be modified as:

P fj jX1 x1 ; X2 x2 ; :::; Xn xn

PX1 x1 ; X2 x2 ; :::; Xn xn j fj

P fj

PX1 x1 ; X2 x2 ; :::; Xn xn

2

By assuming independence among well logs given

certain types of facies, we get what is called a nave

Bayes or simple Bayes classifier given by:

Pfj jX1 x1 ; X2 x2 ; :::; Xn xn

n

Y

PXi xi j fj

P fj

i1

m

P

P f

n

Y

j1

i1

PXi xi j fj

The above posterior probability is computed for each

facies and the prediction is made for the facies associated

with the largest posterior probability. This classification

rule requires preliminary knowledge of univariate probability distributions of well logs, which can be extracted

from training data for each facies. Note that Eq. (3)

differs from Eq. (2) in that Eq. (3) treats values of well

logs as though they were independently distributed.

The nave Bayes classifier is simple and computationally efficient. The independence assumption simpli-

151

conditional densities to be calculated separately for each

well log. Although the independence assumption is

almost certainly violated, the classifier has been shown to

be robust to the violation of independence in classification

and to exhibit surprisingly good performance in many

domains that contain clear attribute dependences (Clark

and Niblett, 1989; Langley et al., 1992). A goal of the

present study is to see whether facies identification is one

of these domains.

2.2. Probability density estimation

Normal probability distributions are often assumed

for data in practical situations. In this study, we assume

log readings x (or, in some cases, natural logarithms of

log readings) given a certain facies f are normally

distributed, with a probability density function given

by:

2

2 xuf

1

2r

Pxj f q e f

2kr2f

1

and f is the mean of log readings given facies f.

Estimates of parameters in the above probability density function can be derived from the training set.

Estimation of parameters in Eq. (4) was done using

standard unbiased univariate estimators, the sample

mean for and the sample variance for 2 . The

sample mean is both the maximum likelihood

estimator and the least squares estimator. The sample

Fig. 1. Location of seven wells in Teapot dome, Powder River Basin, Wyoming.

152

Fig. 2. The matrix plot of GR, NPHI, RHOB and LOGRT shows moderately strong pairwise correlations among NPHI, RHOB and LOGRT.

variance is slightly larger than the maximum likelihood estimator of variance, and in this situation either

the sample variance or the MLE may be used with little

be estimated because they do not enter into the nave

Bayes approach to classification.

Fig. 3. Boxplots of GR, NPHI, RHOB and LOGRT grouped by facies show that overlap of well-log responses is common among the five facies, and

that the most discriminating individual well logs are RHOB and LOGRT.

Table 1

Facies description of Upper Tensleep Formation, Wyoming

Facies

Description

Frequency

Sand dune

High-angle cross-bedding

Siltstone to very fine-grained sandstone

Burrowed, crinkly laminations

Dolomitic sandstone

Horizontal or low angle laminations

Dolomite or sandy dolomite

Massive, fossil (crinoids)

Dolomite, vugs (molds after evaporite

crystals) and fractures

160

Interdune

Sand sheet

Shallow

marine

Sabkha

200

110

153

facies. A program written in Matlab estimated the kernel

density, and the optimal bandwidth for kernel density

estimates (the default bandwidth in Matlab) was calculated on the basis of estimated integrated squared

error (Martinez and Martinez, 2002).

2.3. Discriminant analysis

38

85

to use a nonparametric estimate of the density for each

facies based on kernel density estimation (KDE). In

KDE the density function is approximated by the superposition of a set of kernels (Kraaijveld, 1996). As in

most applications, a particularly popular choice, the

Gaussian or normal kernel was used (Duda and Hart,

1973; Specht, 1990). In keeping with nave Bayes, we

applied univariate kernel density estimation to evaluate

linear or quadratic discriminant analysis. Both forms

assume each well log and their linear combinations are

normally distributed for each facies, an assumption that is

seldom true in practice. Linear discriminant analysis

additionally assumes homogeneity of the variance

covariance structures for the different classes (facies).

This assumption is also violated for the given data set

according to Box's M test. Violation of the homogeneity

assumption may lead to overclassification, which means

cases tend to be assigned to facies with higher variance

due to higher posterior probability. Tabachnick and Fidell

(1996) recommend quadratic discriminant analysis as an

alternative to avoid overclassification. However, due to

Fig. 4. The nave Bayes posterior probabilities, LDA-predicted facies, and observed facies columns of well 55 (f 1 = SD, f 2 = ID, f 3 = SM, f4 = SB,

f5 = SS, LDA = linear discriminant analysis). For clarity, probabilities of classification are split into two figures, Fig. 4 for nave Bayes (BAY) and Fig.

5 for linear discriminant analysis (LDA). Probabilities give more detailed information than class identification (the highest probability class).

Probability curves indicate uncertainty in identification. See also Fig. 5.

154

Fig. 5. The posterior probability, observed facies and BAY-predicted facies columns of well 55 (f 1 = SD, f 2 = ID, f 3 = SM, f4 = SB, f5 = SS,

BAY = nave Bayes classifier). See also Fig. 4. The agreement between nave Bayes and LDA is close. Both methods locate the economically

important stratum f1 but identify a narrower band of f1 than is actually present. F3 is erratically identified by LDA, with similar but slightly superior

performance by nave Bayes. The dominant facies f 2 is identified by both nave Bayes and LDA, although other facies are sometimes labeled as f 2 by

both nave Bayes and LDA.

classification capability in hold out data sets, especially

when a hold out data distribution deviates far from the

training set distributions.

The steps of a discriminant analysis may be summarized as: (1) create discriminant functions from the

training set; (2) use discriminant functions to calculate

discriminant scores; (3) convert discriminant scores to

Mahalanobis distances and associated posterior probabilities; (4) classify observations to the facies associated

with highest posterior probability. We performed

discriminant analysis using the statistical program SPSS.

facies in the rest wells (i.e., the training set). Three wells

(51, 55, 56) were held out respectively as test sets to study

the consistency of the two classification methods. Multiple

analyses are performed: for each analysis one well is held

out as a test set from the beginning and other wells are taken

as the training set.

3. Results and analyses

The geological data, consisting of 593 core readings

and log signatures, were obtained from seven wells in the

Upper Tensleep Formation in Teapot Dome, Powder

2.4. Cross-validation

Cross-validation evaluates classification performance

by using two independent samples of data, one to learn the

rule and another to test it. In this study, seven wells (Fig. 1)

were selected on the basis of stratigraphic and geographic

coverage, availability of appropriate well logs, and

availability of core analysis data. Due to limited data and

limited facies types in some wells, instead of leaving out a

randomly selected well as the test set, the hold out well was

Table 2

Classification results of linear discriminant analysis in well 55

Observed

SD

ID

SM

Predicted

Percent

SD

ID

SM

SB

SS

correct

8

0

0

9

66

4

0

0

8

0

0

2

0

2

2

47.1%

97.1%

50%

155

Table 3

Classification results of nave Bayes classifier in well 55

Observed

SD

ID

SM

Predicted

Percent

SD

ID

SM

SB

SS

correct

5

0

0

12

60

4

0

0

8

0

0

4

0

8

0

29.4%

88.2%

50.0%

Basin, the 150-foot-thick Upper Tensleep Formation at

depth 53005800 ft is composed of eolianmarine sequences, featured by sandstones, dolomitic sandstones,

sandy dolomite, and dolomite.

The well-log data consist of gamma-ray (GR),

neutron porosity (NPHI), formation density (RHOB),

and deep resistivity (LLD). The resistivity data are lognormally distributed, so a natural log transform of these

data was taken and designated LOGRT. Among the four

well logs, the variables NPHI, RHOB, and LOGRT show

moderately strong pairwise correlations with each other

(Fig. 2).

Different facies have different responses in well logs,

but overlap of well-log responses is very common among

different facies (Fig. 3). The most discriminating

individual well logs are RHOB and LOGRT. The least

discriminating log is GR.

Five facies were identified based on descriptions of

well cores: sand dune (SD), interdune (ID), shallow marine (SM), sabkha (SB) and sand sheet (SS). The decription and frequency of the five facies are presented in

Table 1.

Both linear discriminant analysis and the nave Bayes

classifier are applied in three hold out wells with priors

analysis suggests that both approaches perform consistently in the

three analyzed wells. (LDA = linear discriminant analysis, BAY =

nave Bayes classifier).

For each method, a predicted facies column is produced

with corresponding posterior probability column for

each well. The classification results of the two methods

in one of the three hold out wells are illustrated in Figs. 4

and 5. The cross-validation results (Tables 2 and 3)

suggest that: (1) Interdune, the most prevalent facies, are

mostly correctly classified; (2) Although less than 50%

of sand dune, the main hydrocarbon reservoir, is correctly identified, no other facies are misclassified as sand

dune. Also, misclassifications of sand dune typically

occur physically adjacent to correct classifications of sand

dune.

In the current data, the normal-based Bayes classifier

achieved a higher success rate than did the KDE-based

Bayes classifier (Fig. 6), with increases in classification

rate by up to 20%. Thus the normality assumption is

appropriate for probability density estimation of specified well logs when using the nave Bayes classifier.

Both linear discriminant analysis and the normaldistribution-based nave Bayes classifier perform consistently in three wells with average success rate 74%

(Fig. 7).

4. Discussion and conclusions

estimation of well logs suggests the normal assumption is more

appropriate than is kernel density estimation. (KDE = kernel density

estimation, NOR = normal distribution).

identification from well logs primarily depends on how

the probability densities are estimated and how priors are

distributed. Estimation of probability densities is important for the calculation of the likelihood and thus for

estimation of the posterior distribution of facies. Comparison of KDE and the normal distribution surprisingly

indicates that a normal distribution gives better results

156

of the normal assumption over KDE implies that incorporating efforts to find the actual distribution does not

necessarily improve prediction. Optimal bandwidths

probably follow the data too closely, and broader bandwidth with smoother density estimates could be expected

to perform better. Under the normality assumption, the

bandwidth goes to infinity, which leads to an increased

robustness of the classifier, as the location of the decision

surface is less affected by noise and outliers in the data

(Kraaijveld, 1996). Furthermore, compared with other

density estimation methods, fitting log readings to a

normal distribution is simple, computationally efficient

and reliable for purposes of facies identification.

The choice of priors also plays a role in classification.

The cross-validation in well 55 (Table 3) indicates that most

of sand dune facies are misclassified as interdune. This is

probably due to interdune's much higher prior probability,

the larger variance in well logs for interdune over sand

dune, or a combination of these two influences. Classification based on an alternative prior distribution, which

takes the average of the prior from the training set and an

equal prior (all probabilities = 0.2), failed to improve

results. We conclude for the given data that the difference

in the variance of well logs among facies plays a more

important role than does the prior distribution. In

heterogeneous deposits like fluvial deposits where the

prior distribution plays a more important role, the

performance of nave Bayes classifier may be less

consistent than that in homogeneous marine deposits.

Although linear discriminant analysis requires multivariate normality and equal variances across groups, past

experience shows that violation of these assumptions does

not generally lead to poor prediction, a finding that is

justified by this study. How the degree of violation of the

normality assumption affects the prediction is hard to

characterize precisely and is still unknown. On the other

hand, violation of the homogeneity assumption is known to

lead to overclassification. Our cross-validation (Table 2)

demonstrates that some sand dune are misclassified as

interdune, which is probably the result of overclassification. This explanation is consistent with the observation

that the two most discriminating well logs, RHOB and

NPHI, show substantial overlap between interdune and

sand dune, and interdune has larger spread than sand dune.

Quadratic discriminant analysis, which is a natural remedy

to this problem, was also tested, but, with a success rate of

67.3%, we judged it to be inferior to linear discriminant

analysis for the present application. The probable difficulty

with quadratic discriminant analysis in the current setting is

overfitting of the training set coupled with heterogeneity of

distributions within facies across physical sites.

among predictors. Violation of the independence

assumption is substantial but does not adversely affect

the classification in this study. One possible reason is

that although the estimated posteriors are not necessarily correct, the group associated with the highest

i Pxi j fj =Pxi is the group associated with the highest P(X| fj) / P(X). This slightly weaker condition relaxes

the importance of the strict independence assumption.

An attempt to replace the four well-log variables with

four corresponding principle components in the nave

Bayes classifier ends up with 42% success rate in the

hold out well 55. This initially surprising result may be

explained by noting that: (1) Estimation of too many

parameters in the variancecovariance matrix for each

facies may introduce error; (2) The difference in the

correlation among well logs from one facies to another

facies complicates principle component analysis; (3)

Although principle components in the training set are

independent of each other, the principle components of

the test set, which are calculated based on the principle

component functions derived from the training set, are

not necessarily independent due to the difference in

distribution between the test set and the training set.

In this study, the nave Bayes classifier performs the

classification as well as does linear discriminant analysis in

terms of efficiency and consistency. Although we selected

normal likelihoods, nave Bayes requires no assumption

on data distribution, which makes it a more universal

technique than discriminant analysis. We conclude that the

nave Bayes classifier is worthy of consideration in general

for problems of facies identification.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. P.G. Yin for providing the data and professional advice, Q.S. Zhang for

his contribution to facies analysis, Huaiyu Yuan for valuable discussion and insight, and an anonymous reviewer,

whose comments substantively improved the paper.

References

Avseth, P., Mukerji, T., Jorstad, A., Mavko, G., Veggeland, T., 2001.

Seismic reservoir mapping from 3-D AVO in a North Sea turbidite

system. Geophysics 66 (4), 11571176.

Bhatt, A., Helle, H., 2002. Determination of facies from well logs

using modular neural networks. Pet. Geosci. 8 (3), 217228.

Clark, P., Niblett, T., 1989. The CN2 induction algorithm. Mach.

Learn. 3 (4), 261283.

Coudert, L., Frappa, M., Arias, R., 1994. A statistical method for lithofacies identification. J. Appl. Geophys. 32, 257267.

Cuddy, S., 2000. Litho-facies and permeability prediction from electrical

logs using fuzzy logic. SPE Reserv. Evalu. Eng. 3 (4), 319324.

Derek, H., Johns, R., Pasternack, E., 1990. Comparative study of a

backpropagation neural network and statistical pattern recognition

techniques in identifying sandstone lithofacies. Proceedings 1990

Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Petroleum Exploration and

Production. Texas A and M University, College Station, TX, pp.

4149.

Duda, R., Hart, P., 1973. Pattern Classification and Scene Analysis.

John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York. 482 pp.

Iloghalu, E., 2003. Application of neural networks technique in

lithofacies classifications used for 3-D reservoir geological modeling

and exploration studies. AAPG Annual Meeting Abstract.

Kapur, L., Lake, L., Sepehrnoori, K., 2000. Probability logs for facies

classification. In Situ 24 (1), 5758.

Kraaijveld, M., 1996. A Parzen classifier with an improved robustness

against deviations between training and test data. Pattern Recogn.

Lett. 17 (7), 679689.

Langley, P., Iba, W., Thompson, K., 1992. An analysis of Bayesian

classifiers. Proceedings of the Tenth National Conference on

Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press, San Jose, CA.

157

MATLAB. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Florida. 616 pp.

Saggaf, M., Nebrija, E., 2003. A fuzzy logic approach for the estimation

of facies from wire-line logs. AAPG Bull. 87 (7), 12231240.

Sakurai, S., Melvin, J., 1988. Facies discrimination and permeability

estimation from well logs for the Endicott field. 29th Annual

APWLA Symposium. San Antonio, Texas.

Siripitayananon, P., Chen, H., Hart, B., 2001. A new technique for

lithofacies prediction: back-propagation neural network. Proceedings of the 39th Annual ACM-SE Conference.

Specht, D., 1990. Probabilistic neural networks. Neural Netw. 3, 110118.

Tabachnick, B., Fidell, L., 1996. Using Multivariate Statistics.

HarperCollins College Publishers, New York.

Tang, H., White, C., Zeng, X., Gani, M., Bhattacharya, J., 2004.

Comparison of multivariate statistical algorithms for wireline log

facies classification. AAPG Annual Meeting Abstract, vol. 88, p. 13.

Wong, P., Jian, F., Taggart, I., 1995. A critical comparison of neural

networks and discriminant analysis in lithofacies, porosity and

permeability predictions. J. Pet. Geol. 18 (2), 191206.

- SUG243 - Cartography - Data Classification MethodTransféré parMuhammad Ruzaini
- Soft Computing QuizTransféré parLokesh Ceg
- Multi-Label Classification of Music Into EmotionsTransféré parmachinelearner
- Multilabel ThingsTransféré parRowan
- Bayesian Updating 2012Transféré parJulie
- Machine LearningTransféré parrybk
- BossTransféré parhbuddy
- Bigdata Edu Lecture Slide PDFs W001V005Transféré parVictor Ibrahim Cordero OHiggins
- An Evaluation of Machine Learning in Algorithm Selection for Search Problems.pdfTransféré parravigobi
- traffic_identification_engine.pdfTransféré parJohn C. Young
- BayesClassifier UpdatedTransféré parRaghavendra M Bhat
- A quantitative approach to fluvial facies models.pdfTransféré parJordy Smhit
- SCProj.pdfTransféré parjyoti prakash sahoo
- Discriminant AnalysisTransféré parpopat vishal
- Lab-11 Random ForestTransféré parKamranKhan
- Financial Statement Indicators of Financial Failure an Empirical Study on Turkish Public Companies During the November 2000 and February 2001 Crisis - 2009 - AktanTransféré parUmar Farooq Attari
- FFFF ReportTransféré parAnonymous A4NHI5
- Safe Keeping Evolution PatternTransféré parGovindaram Rajesh
- Linear Regression and Load ForecastingTransféré parKarthik r
- s2.0-S1877705812008375-main غدا.pdfTransféré parMohammed Tawfik
- Plant Recognition using Hog and Artificial Neural NetworkTransféré parEditor IJRITCC
- lecture13_4up.pdfTransféré parInderjeetSingh
- Business StatisticsTransféré parHillary Grace Verona
- FinalTransféré parkartik3e
- MFCC Based Enlargement of the Training Set for Emotion Recognition in SpeechTransféré parsipij
- sutcliffe1957.pdfTransféré parMd Nazrul Islam Mondal
- Pattern Analysis Poem RecogfbfjTransféré parNico Di Angelo
- 10.1.1.36Transféré parSulthan .A
- 3dobject Labeling Icra 12Transféré parTyrell Crawford

- Simple Past Elvis Presley & James DeanTransféré parncguerreiro
- Jurisdiction of the Court1Transféré parAnonymous lYBiiLh
- Six ThinkingTransféré parDevendra Patani
- Guide Specification for Coating Systems With Inorganic Zinc-Rich PrimeTransféré parPISA74
- PR1.docxTransféré parAMEER MOHAMMAD
- The Stuff of Bits_ an Essay on the Materia - Paul DourishTransféré parAmália
- Fortuitous EventTransféré parPJr Millete
- Seginus Inc is Proud to Announce New PMA Release: 725495EH Thrust Washer (OEM 725495 Thrust Washer)Transféré parPR.com
- Healthy Muslim Guide.pdfTransféré parSyed Ahad
- Hynx v RMBSTransféré parGrandeplease
- fba 1Transféré parapi-302390134
- William Dahl v. Mary Johnston, 3rd Cir. (2015)Transféré parScribd Government Docs
- Duty to MiscegenateTransféré parWesley Yang
- imogenekingfinalTransféré parapi-239581502
- A Gratefulness Guide to Jewish FestivalsTransféré parHenry Glazer
- 61646 Levelised Cost of Electricity Peer Review Paper FINALTransféré parNelson Alejandro Melo
- Patent Ductus ArteriosusTransféré parBlake Kammin
- Managing Personal Finance 1Transféré parJiNx Ang
- Complete Denture Case HistoryTransféré parJoyce Lim
- Chromatography - Introductory TheoryTransféré parantoni
- Gregory v. Chicago, 394 U.S. 111 (1969)Transféré parScribd Government Docs
- Mastitis 2Transféré parAyu
- Lysine Cartel 08Transféré parEliad Becker
- The Trojan War.pdfTransféré paroscarivanquintero
- MLA citation handout 2.docxTransféré parTonya
- Risk in Capital BudgetingTransféré parHaresh Verma
- Chapter 24 - Fundamentals of Corporate Finance 9th Edition - Test BankTransféré parKellyGibbons
- core professional disclosure statementTransféré parapi-269544853
- spru600aTransféré parGeorge Tavares
- HealthSouth Scandals Negative RamificationsTransféré parDaniel Sowders