Study on Impact of Compositional Gradient on Volatile Oil Reservoir Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existing of compositional gradient in volatile oil reservoir makes the reservoir special. It will have great significance in calculating reserves, determining reasonable development mode and improving volatile oil recovery，if the composition profile and vertical distribution characteristic of the underground fluid are considered, when developing volatile oil reservoir. Based on the theory of compositional gradient[1], the paper analyzed the compositional gradient in various kinds of reservoir, researched the impact of compositional gradient on reserves estimation in volatile oil reservoir, and then evaluated the final recovery efficiency of different development modes (depletion, water-flood, gas injection) with the method of compositional numerical simulation. Results show that: If the reservoir fluid contains more light components, the compositional gradient phenomenon will be more obvious; by choosing fluid samples at the middle of the reservoir to calculate reserves of the volatile oil reservoir, accurate value will be obtained; when developing volatile oil reservoirs, the compositional gradient phenomenon affects greater on recovery efficiency of gas injection development than that of depletion and water-flood development. The achievements provide theoretical guidance and basis for volatile oil reservoir development. Key words: Volatile oil reservoir; Compositional gradient; Compositional simulation; Development mode; Phase behavior
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".