MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965143756 · doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.515

Experimental study on a single cement-fracture using CO2 rich brine

2011· article· en· W1965143756 on OpenAlexaff
Tevfik Yalcinkaya, Mileva Radonjic, Clinton S. Willson, Stefan Bachu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Procedia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsAlberta Innovates
FundersOffice of Science
KeywordsCementBrinePorosityGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceAquiferPetroleum engineeringWellboreSaturation (graph theory)Environmental scienceGeologyComposite materialGroundwaterChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficiency of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects is directly related to the long term sealing efficiency of barrier systems and of wellbore cement in wellbores penetrating storage reservoirs. The microfractures inside the wellbore cement provide possible pathways for CO 2 leakage to the surface and/or fresh water aquifers, impairing the long-term containment of CO 2 in the subsurface. The purpose of this experimental study is to understand the dynamic alteration process in the cement caused by the acidic brine. The first experiment, at ambient temperature and pressure, was conducted by flowing CO 2 -rich brine through 1 in. by 2 in. (25.4 mm by 50.8 mm) cement cores for 4 and 8 weeks durations. The second experiment was a 4 weeks long flow-through experiment conducted at ambient conditions using a 1 in. by 12 in.(25.4 mm by 304.8 mm) cement core and CO 2 -rich brine with a core flooding system under 600 psi (4.13 MPa) confining stress. Post-experiment material analysis from both experiments confirmed leaching of Ca 2+ from reacted cement, as reported in literature. However for the first time, porosity of the reacted regions was semi-quantified applying micro-CT images.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy ProcediaSame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207