1
Maui-A1 · Triple combo — main pass LAS 3.0 · your choice on Confident choice
What might you have missed?
Broadly confident
A second opinion on the dataset you chose — evidence, trade-offs and an alternative — reviewed the way a senior colleague would, before you commit.
3Your decision
Selected dataset
Triple combo — main pass
LAS 3.0Well log · Maui-A1
Purpose
Reviewing forFormation evaluation
Known limitations
Borehole washout 2,880–2,905 m — density unreliable over the interval.
No image log yet — fracture & dip work unavailable.
No offset control to the north — interpretation under-constrained there.
4AI reviewExplainable · second opinion
Evidence that supports the choice
Trade-offs you are accepting
A second opinion
Alternative recommendation
87%→91%projected confidence
What changed
How I reached thisreasoning, not a verdict
WeighedValidation, coverage, lineage, reuse and governance — each read against your stated purpose.
Led byValidation and coverage, because formation evaluation depends most on clean, complete measurements over the pay.
Tempered byThe density washout and the missing image log — the two places the evidence is thin.
ThereforeA sound choice, strengthened by pairing the repeat section over the washout. I'd suggest it, not insist.
5Decision
AI recommendation
Pair the main pass with the repeat section to close the density gap.
Raises projected confidence 87% → 91% for formation evaluation, with no new governance risk.
Human approval required. Nothing publishes without your sign-off — the AI advises, you decide.