An overview of laboratory apparatuses to measure seismic attenuation in reservoir rocks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Intrinsic wave attenuation at seismic frequencies is strongly dependent on rock permeability, fluid properties, and saturation. However, in order to use attenuation as an attribute to extract information on rock/fluid properties from seismic data, experimental studies on attenuation are necessary for a better understanding of physical mechanisms that are dominant at those frequencies. An appropriate laboratory methodology to measure attenuation at seismic frequencies is the forced oscillation method, but technical challenges kept this technique from being widely used. There is a need for the standardization of devices employing this method, and a comparison of existing setups is a step towards it. Here we summarize the apparatuses based on the forced oscillation method that were built in the last 30 years and were used to measure frequency‐dependent attenuation in fluid‐saturated and/or dry reservoir rocks under small strains (10 −8 –10 −5 ). We list and discuss important technical aspects to be taken into account when working with these devices or in the course of designing a new one. We also present a summary of the attenuation measurements in reservoir rock samples performed with these apparatuses so far.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 it