license: cc-by-nc-4.0
task_categories:
- tabular-classification
- tabular-regression
language:
- en
tags:
- synthetic
- scenario-simulation
- what-if-analysis
- decision-support
- executive-ai
- oil-and-gas
- price-shock
- operational-risk
- supply-chain-disruption
- cyberattack-scenarios
- emergency-response
- recovery-timeline
- black-swan
- ipieca
- iea
- eia
- ccps
- ics-cert
- business-continuity
- enterprise-risk
pretty_name: OIL-043 — Synthetic Scenario Simulation Dataset (Sample)
size_categories:
- 100K<n<1M
OIL-043 — Synthetic Scenario Simulation Dataset (Sample)
A schema-identical preview of OIL-043, the XpertSystems.ai synthetic
what-if scenario simulation dataset for oil & gas decision-support AI,
business-continuity modeling, enterprise risk management (ERM), and
executive-tier decision-support training. The full product covers 12,000
facilities × 250,000 scenarios across a 5-year horizon. This sample is the
generator's sample mode (750 facilities × 8,000 scenarios) covering all
12 product tables.
Built by XpertSystems.ai — Synthetic Data Platform Contact pradeep@xpertsystems.ai · xpertsystems.ai License CC-BY-NC-4.0 (sample); commercial license available for the full product.
What OIL-043 does that nothing else in the catalog does
OIL-043 is the catalog's first decision-support / what-if scenario SKU. Where OIL-042 (Digital Twin) models the steady-state operations of an oilfield, OIL-043 models the perturbations to those operations — price shocks, operational disruptions, equipment failure cascades, supply chain interruptions, inventory stress, logistics constraints, cyberattacks, emergency response, market recovery — each linked to a scenario_id with pre-built ML labels (disruption probability, resilience score, financial impact, decision priority).
This is the substrate that ERM, business-continuity, and executive decision-support AI teams have been waiting for: a coherent, joinable dataset where commodity shocks, OT cyber incidents, supply chain delays, and equipment failure cascades can be modeled together with shared severity, region, and decision-priority labels.
| Buyer Persona | Use Case |
|---|---|
| Chief Risk Officer / ERM | Enterprise risk scoring across 9 scenario types |
| Business Continuity Director | Recovery time estimation, escalation modeling |
| C-suite Decision Support AI | Executive priority labels (low/medium/high/critical) |
| CISO / OT Security | ICS attack impact on operations (SCADA availability) |
| Strategic Planning / S&OP | Multi-scenario portfolio stress testing |
| Insurance / Reinsurance | Loss-severity distribution modeling for upstream |
What's inside
12 CSV tables organized around a scenario_id master key: scenario master
→ price shocks → operational disruptions → equipment failure chains →
production impacts → supply chain interruptions → inventory depletion →
logistics constraints → cyberattack scenarios → emergency response → market
recovery timelines → pre-built ML labels.
| Table | Rows (sample) | What it represents |
|---|---|---|
scenario_master.csv |
8,000 | 9-class scenario type × 4-class severity × facility/region/duration |
price_shock_events.csv |
~12,000 | 7-commodity panel: WTI, Brent, HenryHubGas, Diesel, Gasoline, LNG_JKM, FuelOil |
operational_disruptions.csv |
~26,000 | 6-class disruption × 8-class root cause × throughput loss + downtime |
equipment_failure_chains.csv |
~19,000 | 8-class asset × 8-class failure mode × cascade level + spare availability |
production_impacts.csv |
8,000 | Lost volume boe + revenue loss + ramp-down/up hours per scenario |
supply_chain_interruptions.csv |
~15,000 | Route disruption with cost-increase + rerouting + supplier risk |
inventory_depletion.csv |
8,000 | 4-class stress level × depletion rate × days-to-stockout |
logistics_constraints.csv |
~4,500 | 5-class transport mode × congestion + demurrage cost |
cyberattack_scenarios.csv |
~1,100 | 5-class ICS attack × SCADA availability + manual operation flag |
emergency_response.csv |
~5,600 | 4-level escalation (site/regional/corporate/regulatory) + IC + exec brief |
market_recovery_timelines.csv |
8,000 | Stabilization + full-recovery days + residual risk + lessons-learned |
scenario_labels.csv |
8,000 | Pre-built ML labels: disruption prob + resilience + financial impact + decision priority |
Total: ~123,000 rows, ~12 MB. The full OIL-043 product is ~4 million rows.
Calibration sources
Every distribution and ratio is anchored to named public references. Highlights:
- IPIECA Operating Risk Framework + IEA Black-Swan Scenario Library — scenario severity and rare-event distributions.
- IEA / EIA / S&P Platts commodity reference panels — 7-commodity price-shock taxonomy.
- ISO 14224:2016 + API RP 691 — rotating equipment failure-mode taxonomy.
- CCPS Bow-Tie + LOPA cascade analysis — equipment failure cascade depth ranges.
- ICS-CERT + NIST SP 800-82 — ICS/OT incident-impact SCADA-availability degradation bands.
- EIA / API midstream statistics — pipeline transport-mode share.
- IEA Energy Transport Network — 5-class logistics transport-mode taxonomy.
- OECD / IEA Scenario Recovery — disruption-event recovery timelines.
- CCPS Root-Cause Analysis + ASSE/ASSP — lessons-learned and corrective action norms.
Validation scorecard
The wrapper ships a 10-metric scorecard (validation_scorecard.json) that
re-scores the dataset on every generation. Default seed 42 result:
| ID | Metric | Target | Observed | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M01 | Scenario-Type Taxonomy (floor) | ≥ 9 | 9 | IPIECA / IEA |
| M02 | Commodity Panel Coverage (floor) | ≥ 7 | 7 | IEA / EIA / Platts |
| M03 | Failure-Mode Taxonomy (floor) | ≥ 8 | 8 | ISO 14224 / API RP 691 |
| M04 | Critical-Severity Scenario Share | 0.04–0.08 | 0.067 | IPIECA Operating Risk |
| M05 | Cascade Level (mean) | 1.5–3.5 | 2.41 | CCPS Bow-Tie / LOPA |
| M06 | Cyber-Active SCADA Availability % | 55–85 | 72.9 | ICS-CERT / NIST 800-82 |
| M07 | Transport-Mode Taxonomy (floor) | ≥ 5 | 5 | IEA Energy Transport |
| M08 | Pipeline Transport Share | 0.30–0.50 | 0.38 | EIA / API midstream |
| M09 | Full Recovery Days (median) | 0–60 | 21.2 | OECD / IEA Scenario |
| M10 | Lessons Learned (mean) | 3–7 | 4.97 | CCPS RCA / ASSE |
Grade: A+ (100/100). Verified across seeds 42, 7, 123, 2024, 99, 1.
Suggested use cases
- Decision-support AI training —
scenario_labels.csvprovides 4-class decision priority labels (low / medium / high / critical) plus a binarymodel_labelcalibrated against disruption probability + financial impact. Train executive priority-classification models with ~27% positive class density. - Enterprise risk scoring (ERM) —
disruption_probability,resilience_score,financial_impact_score, andoperational_risk_scoreare per-scenario continuous-valued ML targets. Train regression models for portfolio-wide risk scoring. - Multi-modal scenario impact modeling — join across all 11 event
tables on
scenario_idto train models that predict downstream impact (production loss, recovery time) from upstream signals (price shock, cyber event, equipment failure). - Cascading failure modeling —
equipment_failure_chains.csvhascascade_level(1–6) for upstream → downstream failure propagation. Train graph-neural-network or Bow-Tie analysis models. - Cyber-physical impact estimation —
cyberattack_scenarios.csv×operational_disruptions.csv×production_impacts.csvenable Industroyer / TRITON / Colonial Pipeline-class incident impact modeling. - Supply chain stress testing — scenario portfolios with linked inventory depletion + logistics constraints + cost increase enable multi-tier supply-chain network resilience modeling.
- Black-swan rare-event modeling —
is_rare_eventflag identifies critical-severity scenarios with explicit rare-event injection. - Cross-vertical scenario validation — the 9-class scenario taxonomy applies analogously to other XpertSystems verticals (Insurance, Healthcare, Cybersecurity); buyers can use OIL-043 as the framework for building their own scenario libraries.
Loading
from datasets import load_dataset
scenarios = load_dataset(
"xpertsystems/oil043-sample",
data_files="scenario_master.csv",
split="train",
)
labels = load_dataset(
"xpertsystems/oil043-sample",
data_files="scenario_labels.csv",
split="train",
)
disruptions = load_dataset(
"xpertsystems/oil043-sample",
data_files="operational_disruptions.csv",
split="train",
)
Or with pandas directly:
import pandas as pd
from huggingface_hub import hf_hub_download
path = hf_hub_download(
repo_id="xpertsystems/oil043-sample",
filename="market_recovery_timelines.csv",
repo_type="dataset",
)
df = pd.read_csv(path)
All 12 tables share scenario_id as the master join key. Most tables also
carry facility_id for cross-cutting joins. Aggregation patterns:
scenario_master ⨝ scenario_labels(1:1) — every scenario has labelsscenario_master ⨝ operational_disruptions(1:N) — multiple disruptions per scenarioscenario_master ⨝ equipment_failure_chains(1:N) — failure cascadesscenario_master ⨝ cyberattack_scenarios(1:0–1) — cyber-only scenariosscenario_master ⨝ market_recovery_timelines(1:1) — every scenario has recovery
Schema highlights
scenario_master.csv — scenario_id, facility_id, scenario_type
(9-class: price_shock / equipment_failure / operational_disruption /
supply_chain_interruption / inventory_stress / cyberattack /
weather_disruption / geopolitical_event / regulatory_shutdown),
severity_level ∈ {low, medium, high, critical}, region (8-class),
facility_type (8-class), start_timestamp, duration_hours,
is_rare_event, dependency_count, baseline_capacity_boe_per_day,
scenario_complexity_score ∈ [0, 1].
price_shock_events.csv — commodity (7-class IEA/EIA panel),
shock_direction ∈ {up, down}, shock_magnitude_pct,
volatility_regime ∈ {normal, elevated, stressed, crisis},
spread_impact_bps, mean_reversion_days.
equipment_failure_chains.csv — asset_type (8-class:
compressor / pump / valve / pipeline_segment / turbine / heat_exchanger /
storage_tank / separator), failure_mode (8-class ISO 14224),
cascade_level ∈ {1, …, 6} (CCPS Bow-Tie), mtbf_hours_before_failure,
estimated_repair_hours, spare_part_available (links to OIL-041
spare-parts demand), failure_probability.
cyberattack_scenarios.csv — attack_type (5-class:
scada_lockout / ransomware / sensor_spoofing / data_exfiltration /
network_segmentation_failure), ot_network_impact_score,
scada_availability_pct, manual_operation_required,
containment_hours, estimated_cyber_loss_usd.
scenario_labels.csv — pre-built ML labels:
disruption_probability ∈ [0, 1], resilience_score ∈ [0, 1],
financial_impact_score ∈ [0, 1], operational_risk_score ∈ [0, 1],
recommended_decision_priority ∈ {low, medium, high, critical},
requires_executive_action (binary), model_label (binary,
high+critical = 1).
Calibration notes & limitations
In the spirit of honest synthetic data, a few things buyers of the sample should know:
Throughput loss median is 33% — well above industry-mature 5–15%. The
operational_disruptions.csvtable is biased toward stressed-scenario training utility: throughput losses are sampled as0.08 + sev × 0.55plus noise. The dataset is designed to give ML models trainable positive-class density for severe scenarios, not to estimate routine operations. For routine-disruption analytics, filter toseverity_level == 'low'(33% of records) to recover median throughput loss ~10%.SCADA availability ~73% on cyber-active scenarios. This is the conditional availability during an active cyber incident — not the steady-state SCADA quality (which is ~99.9% in OIL-042's
scada_telemetry.csv). The 73% figure is anchored to ICS-CERT incident reports (55–85% degradation band) and is the metric of interest for cyber-impact modeling.Critical severity rate 6.7%, rare event flag 4.8%. The
is_rare_eventflag is stricter thanseverity_level == 'critical'— it fires only whenseverity == 'critical' AND random < 0.72. This models the IPIECA distinction between "high-severity scenario" (any crit) and "tail-risk / black-swan" (truly novel + catastrophic). Useis_rare_eventfor black-swan modeling,severity_level == 'critical'for general high-severity work.Cyber-attack scenarios are sparse (~1,100 rows). Calibrated to IPIECA's cyber-attack base rate of ~6% of scenarios (with
cyberattack_probabilityconfig flag). For dense cyber-attack ML training, use the full product (prodmode → ~34,000 cyber scenarios) or oversample with weights fromattack_type.Logistics constraints sparse (~4,500 rows). Only fires on supply_chain / weather / geopolitical scenarios + 40% random others. For dense logistics ML, filter to those 3 scenario types directly.
Spare-part availability ~72%, not OIL-041's industry-mature 85%+. In OIL-043, spare availability is conditional on stressed scenarios — it degrades as severity increases by design. Use OIL-041 for steady-state spare-parts inventory analytics; use OIL-043 for crisis- scenario spare-parts unavailability modeling.
Equipment failure mode taxonomy is 8-class here, vs OIL-038's 10-class generator and OIL-042's 10-class. The 8 modes are a subset (the 2 dropped:
wax_deposition,scale_blockage— which are more process-side than mechanical). Cross-SKU joins onfailure_modemay need value normalization.Operational disruption types: 6-class. Smaller than the 18-class OIL-038 failure modes — by design (operational disruptions are at the event level, not the mechanical mode level).
Deterministic seeding. All 12 tables are deterministic on
--seed. Catalog default is seed 42. Seed sweep verifies Grade A+ across {42, 7, 123, 2024, 99, 1}.
Commercial / full product
The full OIL-043 product covers 12,000 facilities × ~250,000
scenarios across a 5-year horizon (4 million rows total), with dense
coverage of all categorical taxonomies including the rare cyber-attack
scenarios (~34,000), heavy-tail black-swan injection at IPIECA-specified
rates, and configurable scenario-portfolio composition for industry-
specific stress testing. Available under commercial license — contact
pradeep@xpertsystems.ai.
XpertSystems.ai also publishes synthetic data products across Cybersecurity, Healthcare, Insurance & Risk, Materials & Energy, and Oil & Gas verticals. Catalog: huggingface.co/xpertsystems.