MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976759792 · doi:10.2118/140449-ms

Enhanced Reservoir Characterization Using Hydraulic Fracture Microseismicity

2011· article· en· W1976759792 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. C. Maxwell, David Cho, Timothy L. Pope, M. P. A. Jones, Craig Cipolla, M. Mack, Freia Henery, Mark Norton, J.. Leonard

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroseismGeologySeismologyHydraulic fracturingAmplitude versus offsetPetrologyFracture (geology)Reservoir modelingAmplitudeGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Microseismic measurements were integrated with seismic reservoir characterization and injection data to investigate variability in the hydraulic fracture response between three horizontal wells in the Montney shale in NE British Columbia, Canada. When wells were close enough, hydraulic fractures were found to interact with pre-existing faults, which acted as a barrier to fracture growth, and resulted in relatively large-magnitude microseismicity. Pre-existing faults were identified by edge detection/ant tracking algorithms applied to seismic reflection data, as well as from advanced analysis of the microseismicity, including microseismic deformation levels, magnitude-frequency characteristics and composite failure mechanism analysis. In cases where the wells were far from pre-existing faults simple, planar hydraulic fractures were observed, although there was a tendency to grow towards regions of low Poisson’s ratio based on amplitude versus offset inversion of the seismic reflection data. The tendency for the hydraulic fractures to be asymmetric and grow preferentially towards the low Poisson’s ratio region is attributed to material property changes and associated lower stresses in these regions. Insight from the enhanced reservoir characterization with integrated microseismic and treatment data is being used for better well placement, improved completion designs and increased production.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations38
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology ConferenceSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207