MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1754300596 · doi:10.1260/0144-5987.33.4.555

Developing Fracture Measure as an Index of Fracture Impact on Well-Logs

2015· article· en· W1754300596 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Exploration & Exploitation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrectnessFracture (geology)GeneralizationHomogeneousMeasure (data warehouse)Artificial neural networkAzimuthComputer scienceGeologyPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsData miningArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmGeometryGeotechnical engineeringMathematical analysisCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the three-dimensional nature of fractures, it is difficult to characterize them completely and accurately. In this paper, a novel fractured zone detection criterion, Fracture Measure (FM), is proposed. FM is a parameter calculated by aperture, fracture type, azimuth and apparent distance. These factors have not been incorporated in previous studies to detect fractured zones. This study attempts to estimate FM by Artificial Neural Network to see if there is any relation between FM and conventional logs and to check the generalization ability of FM. Two datasets were used for the investigation: a real carbonate reservoir of an oil field in Iran and a synthetic heterogeneous reservoir, here incalled SYN. Comparing outputs of heterogeneous and homogeneous conditions showed that the Classification Correctness Rate (CCR) of the model in the homogeneous state was approximately 97%, and in the heterogeneous condition, it was between 74% and approximately 92%. Generalization ability in the homogeneous state varied from 91% to 94%, and in the heterogeneous condition, varied from 52% to 86%. In the real dataset, ANN was able to estimate FM with an average accuracy of approximately 80%and Classification Correctness Rate (CCR) of approximately 100%, which shows that FM could be modeled through well-logs. It is noteworthy that FM is capable of providing a fuzzy measure for fracture study.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it