Investigating Microseismic Responses and Interaction Between Offset Hydraulic Fracture Treatments During Horizontal Well Completions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Observations of microseismic data collected during hydraulic fracturing treatments in horizontal wells often show variations in the numbers of events and/or the locations of the events that cannot be attributed to differences in the treatment schedule, local variations in geology, or rock properties. These variations might be related to induced stresses from previously completed hydraulic fracturing treatments in the same well or in nearby offset wells. The responses to local changes in stress can be difficult to visualize. A method to identify and evaluate the possible influences of induced stress using seismic moment is proposed. Seismic moment is a measure of the intensity of the energy release that is detected as a microseismic event. Moment values can be related to the strains resulting from the deformation that produced the microseismic event. A simple summation of the moment values provides a measurement of the total deformation associated with the microseismic events and is used to compare the microseismic responses of offset fracturing treatments. The cumulative moment responses can be compared to both the separation between consecutive stimulation treatments and the intervening time between those treatments. Two case histories are used to illustrate the observed responses. The first example highlights the effect that resting time between stimulation treatments in a single well has on the microseismic response. The second example examines the contemporaneous completion of multiple wells on a single drilling pad. The initial results presented in this paper show that microseismic responses can be affected by both the time between stimulation treatments and the distance separating offset fracturing treatments even though there appears to be little difference in the external dimensions of the event clouds. The evaluation technique used minimizes monitor well bias when the monitoring tools are deployed in nearby wells. Cumulative moment-based responses therefore provide an analytical tool that can be used to evaluate microseismic responses during hydraulic fracturing treatments that incorporates the characteristics of the microseismic events.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".