MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973811159 · doi:10.2118/165719-ms

Investigating Microseismic Responses and Interaction Between Offset Hydraulic Fracture Treatments During Horizontal Well Completions

2013· article· en· W1973811159 on OpenAlex
Robert Downie, S.L. Reese, Babatunde Ajayi

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

VenueSPE Eastern Regional Meeting · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsSeneca Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroseismHydraulic fracturingGeologySeismologyOffset (computer science)Moment (physics)GeodesyGeotechnical engineeringComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.219 · 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