MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1951606959 · doi:10.1306/13371580st643553

Impact of Reservoir Heterogeneity and Geohistory on the Variability of Bitumen Properties and on the Distribution of Gas-and Water-saturated Zones in the Athabasca Oil Sands, Canada

2013· book-chapter· en· W1951606959 on OpenAlexaffabout
Milovan Fustic, Barry Bennett, Stephen M. Hubbard, Haiping Huang, Thomas B. P. Oldenburg, Steve Larter

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Association of Petroleum Geologists eBooks · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil sandsAsphaltGeologyUnconventional oilSteam-assisted gravity drainageResource (disambiguation)GeochemistryFossil fuelEarth sciencePetroleum engineeringMining engineeringArchaeologyPaleontologyGeographyOil shaleEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Athabasca oil sand deposit, the world’s largest petroleum accumulation, contains an estimated 1.7 trillion bbl of heavily to severely biodegraded oil,with API gravities ranging from 6 to 10°. Although reservoir characterization has been the subject of many studies in the region, very little attention has been given to petroleum (bitumen) characterization and particularly to its reservoir-scale relationship with the host sediments. In this study, variation in the bitumen physical and chemical properties were measured on a suite of samples. These were obtained from numerous cores from various reservoir types and geographic areas of the Athabasca oil sand deposits. The variation in bitumen viscosities and changes in the hydrocarbon composition caused by varying levels of biodegradation were interpreted using molecular markers. These data were integrated into the reservoir facies framework and interpreted in the context of various reservoir configurations.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Association of Petroleum Geologists eBooksSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207