MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974879461 · doi:10.1080/10916466.2010.492372

Pore-Space Microstructure and Clay Content Effect on the Elastic Properties of Sandstones

2012· article· en· W1974879461 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jiang Li, Jianmeng Sun, Xingye Liu

Bibliographic record

VenuePetroleum Science and Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaChina University of Petroleum, Beijing
KeywordsPorosityElastic modulusIsotropyShear (geology)Characterisation of pore space in soilShear modulusGeologyMineralogyWater contentBulk modulusComposite materialMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The elastic moduli of shaly sandstones and the effect of pore aspect ratios and clay content on the elastic properties of shaly sandstones are calculated using an isotropic dual porosity model. It is shown that the elastic moduli and velocities of shaly sandstones are affected by the clay content, pore aspect ratios, and the fluid. The bulk and shear moduli increase with an increase in the aspect ratios of sandstones related to pores whether the sandstones are saturated by water or dry. The P-wave and S-wave velocities of water-saturated shaly sandstones both increase with the increase of the pore aspect ratios. The bulk and shear moduli decrease with an increase in clay content. The relationships between the elastic moduli of the rocks and the clay content are linear, which is in agreement with the laboratory measurements by Han. The bulk modulus of shaly sandstone is sensitive to fluid change when the pore aspect ratio is small.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.198
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePetroleum Science and TechnologySame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207