In this paper, we present methodology to quantify biases in reserves estimates using technical revisions (TRs) listed in reserves-reconciliation reports filed with regulators in the US and Canada. Using this methodology, we assessed the reliability of reserves estimates for 34 companies filing in Canada and 32 companies filing in the US from 2007 to 2017.

Filers in both Canada and the US overestimated proved (1P) reserves, and US filers overestimated 1P reserves (51% positive TRs instead of 90%) more often than Canadian filers (72% positive TRs). Canadian filers underestimated proved-plus-probable (2P) reserves slightly (54% positive TRs instead of 50%). Considering the entire reserves distribution, Canadian filers were moderately overconfident (underestimated uncertainty) and slightly pessimistic. US filers, who report only 1P, were somewhere between the combination of extreme overconfidence and neutral directional bias (DB) and the combination of moderate overconfidence and extreme optimism.

Three groups of professionals can benefit from this study: estimators, who can use the methodology to track their TRs over time, calibrate them, and use this information to improve future estimation procedures; investors, who can analyze reported reserves estimates to compare volumes fairly; and regulators, to whom the paper provides quantitative methodology to suggest to filers to help them ensure compliance with appropriate criteria for 1P and 2P reserves and avoid significant reserves write-downs later.

在本文中，我们介绍了使用在美国和加拿大的监管机构提交的储备对帐报告中列出的技术修订（TR）来量化储备估算偏差的方法。使用这种方法，我们评估了2007年至2017年加拿大34家公司和美国32家公司的储量估计值的可靠性。

加拿大和美国的申报人高估了已证明的（1P）储量，美国申报人高估了1P储量（正TR的51％，而不是90％）比加拿大申报人（正TR的72％）高。加拿大申报人略微低估了探明可能性（2P）储量（TR的阳性率为54％，而不是50％）。考虑到整个储量的分配，加拿大申报者略有过分自信（低估了不确定性），并且有些悲观。仅申报1P的美国申报人介于极端过度自信和中立方向偏见（DB）以及中等过度自信和极端乐观之间。

三类专业人员可以从这项研究中受益：估算者，他们可以使用该方法随着时间的推移跟踪其TR，对其进行校准，并使用此信息来改进未来的估算程序；投资者，他们可以分析报告的储量估计值以公平地比较交易量；监管机构和监管机构，本文提供了定量的方法，以向申报者建议，以帮助申报人确保符合1P和2P储量的适当标准，并避免以后发生大量的储量减记。