This article, written by Senior Technology Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of paper SPE 127761, ’Probabilistic Modeling for Decision Support in Integrated Operations,’ by Martin Giese, University of Oslo, and Reidar B. Bratvold, SPE, University of Stavanger, prepared for the 2010 SPE Intelligent Energy Conference and Exhibition, Utrecht, Netherlands, 23-25 March. The paper has not been peer reviewed. A system was designed to assist operational decisions on the basis of real-time sensor readings in a typical scenario: While drilling close to the transition to a high-pressure formation, gas influx is observed. The technology used Bayesian networks and influence diagrams (IDs) to apply the method of decision analysis. The resulting ID was tested with a simulation. Introduction An assumption of integrated operations is that all information provided by the technology will help to make better decisions faster. But for this to happen, information must be presented in an accessible, useful, and decision-relevant format. Decision-analysis tools provide decision makers with logical and consistent recommendations based on the available data. This decision-analysis method was applied to a real case, representative of a typical scenario in drilling operations. The tool enabled good decisions consistently. However, effort is required and challenges exist in the modeling process along with problems regarding the way decision making is treated in the industry. Modeling and Solving A decision tree provides a graphical illustration of all the uncertainties, decisions, and payoffs associated with a decision situation. Although application of decision trees is intuitive for simple problems, the method loses its appeal for complex decisions. A symmetric decision tree grows exponentially with the number of variables in the decision domain, which often makes its use impractical. For complex decisions, the ID can provide a level of insight and transparency that cannot be achieved with the equivalent decision tree. The ID is a compact graphical-model representation for reasoning under uncertainty and was developed to assist structuring and analysis of complex decisions. The ID has two advantages—structuring and probabilistic evaluation. The structuring provides a graphical representation of the inter-relationships among the decision-basis elements (i.e., alternatives, information, and preferences), while the evaluation appraises the resulting decision structure and provides an assessment of its expected utility given the quantified decision basis. The representational framework of an ID captures the probabilistic relationships among decisions (alternatives), key uncertainties (information), and utilities (values or preferences). The ID model comprises four types of nodes. Decision nodes specify a set of alternatives. Chance nodes represent the key uncertainties in the decision domain. Deterministic nodes represent either constants or intermediate calculations. Value nodes represent the criteria used to make the decisions.