MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973953846 · doi:10.2118/148338-ms

Impact of Heterogeneous Geomechanical Properties on Coupled Geomechanical-Flow Simulation of SAGD

2011· article· en· W1973953846 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference and Exhibition · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCMG Reservoir Simulation Foundation
KeywordsGeomechanicsReservoir simulationPetrophysicsPetroleum engineeringGeologyPermeability (electromagnetism)Flow (mathematics)Simulation modelingGeotechnical engineeringReservoir engineeringPorosityMechanicsPetroleumMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the modern oil industry, geostatistical property models are built for different purposes such as resource estimation and flow simulation. Processing of multiple realizations, obtained from geostatistical simulation techniques, helps assess uncertainty analysis which is important for development planning and decision-making processes. Each geological model is a combination of structural, facies, and attributes models. In the case of conventional flow simulation (i.e. without considering geomechanical simulation), the petrophysical properties porosity, permeability and saturation, are the only attributes necessary to model. These parameters are included in the fluid flow governing equations. But in the case of dealing with coupled geomechanical-flow simulation, rock mechanical properties are also required. In the case of conventional simulation process, geostatistical property models have been used widely, but in the case of coupled geomechanical-flow simulation processes, geostatistical modeling for geomechanical attributes has yet to be incorporated. Therefore, uncertainty assessment could be underestimated according to the spatial distribution of these parameters. In this work, the effect of heterogeneous geomechanical properties on coupled geomechanical-flow simulation process was investigated for a steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process for a heavy oil reservoir in Alberta-Canada. Cumulative oil Production (COP), Steam Oil Ratio (SOR) and Vertical Deformation Profile (VDP) of the top of reservoir is considered as three simulation output variables. Consideration of heterogeneous models for both flow and geomechanical properties in coupled geomechanical flow simulation of the SAGD process resulted in a range of uncertainties for these three variables. The importance of considering geomechanical properties as heterogeneous models is illustrated by comparing these ranges with the ranges obtained from coupled simulations in which geomechanical properties are considered as homogeneous models. Representative synthetic data of a sand/shale spatial distribution of McMurray formation in Alberta-Canada is considered for the case study.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.217 · 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