Currently in the petroleum industry, operators often flare the produced gas instead of commodifying it. The flaring magnitudes are large in some states, which constitute problems with energy waste and CO2 emissions. In North Dakota, operators are required to estimate and report the volume flared. The questions are, how good is the quality of this reporting, and what insights can be drawn from it? Apart from the company-reported statistics, which are available from the North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC), flared volumes can be estimated via satellite remote sensing, serving as an unbiased benchmark. Since interpretation of the Landsat 8 imagery is hindered by artifacts due to glow, the estimated volumes based on the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) are used. Reverse geocoding is performed for comparing and contrasting the NDIC and VIIRS data at different levels, such as county and oilfield. With all the data gathered and preprocessed, Bayesian learning implemented by MCMC methods is performed to address three problems: county level model development, flaring time series analytics, and distribution estimation. First, there is heterogeneity among the different counties, in the associations between the NDIC and VIIRS volumes. In light of such, models are developed for each county by exploiting hierarchical models. Second, the flaring time series, albeit noisy, contains information regarding trends and patterns, which provide some insights into operator approaches. Gaussian processes are found to be effective in many different pattern recognition scenarios. Third, distributional insights are obtained through unsupervised learning. The negative binomial and GMMs are found to effectively describe the oilfield flare count and flared volume distributions, respectively. Finally, a nearest-neighbor-based approach for operator level monitoring and analytics is introduced.

The K-nearest neighbor (KNN) classifier is one of the simplest and most common classifiers, yet its performance competes with the most complex classifiers in the literature. The core of this classifier depends mainly on measuring the distance or similarity between the tested example and the training examples. This raises a major question about which distance measures to be used for the KNN classifier among a large number of distance and similarity measures? This review attempts to answer the previous question through evaluating the performance (measured by accuracy, precision and recall) of the KNN using a large number of distance measures, tested on a number of real world datasets, with and without adding different levels of noise. The experimental results show that the performance of KNN classifier depends significantly on the distance used, the results showed large gaps between the performances of different distances. We found that a recently proposed non-convex distance performed the best when applied on most datasets comparing to the other tested distances. In addition, the performance of the KNN degraded only about $20\%$ while the noise level reaches $90\%$, this is true for all the distances used. This means that the KNN classifier using any of the top $10$ distances tolerate noise to a certain degree. Moreover, the results show that some distances are less affected by the added noise comparing to other distances.

We introduce a variant of the $k$-nearest neighbor classifier in which $k$ is chosen adaptively for each query, rather than supplied as a parameter. The choice of $k$ depends on properties of each neighborhood, and therefore may significantly vary between different points. (For example, the algorithm will use larger $k$ for predicting the labels of points in noisy regions.) We provide theory and experiments that demonstrate that the algorithm performs comparably to, and sometimes better than, $k$-NN with an optimal choice of $k$. In particular, we derive bounds on the convergence rates of our classifier that depend on a local quantity we call the `advantage' which is significantly weaker than the Lipschitz conditions used in previous convergence rate proofs. These generalization bounds hinge on a variant of the seminal Uniform Convergence Theorem due to Vapnik and Chervonenkis; this variant concerns conditional probabilities and may be of independent interest.