MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977771028 · doi:10.2118/80409-pa

Semianalytical Modeling of Complex-Geometry Reservoirs

2002· article· en· W1977771028 on OpenAlexaff
Gang Zhao, L. G. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaplace transformComputationComplex geometryGeometryGeologyComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Complex geometry reservoirs can be encountered in the field for a variety of depositional and tectonic processes. For example, fluvial depositional environments may produce interbranching channel reservoirs or reservoirs consisting of relatively high-permeability channels in communication with low-permeability splays. This paper presents a general methodology for computing pressure responses and flow characteristics in complex geometry reservoirs. The proposed method consists of decomposing the original complex-geometry reservoir into a set of simple-geometry reservoirs, which interact with each other by transfer of fluid and equality of pressure over the regions where they are in hydraulic contact. Analytical solutions are written for each of the simple reservoir components in terms of the unknown pressures and fluxes at their boundaries, and the coupled systems are solved for the desired wellbore pressure responses. The method of sources and sinks is used to compute the pressure response in the Laplace domain, and the results are inverted numerically with the Stehfest Inversion algorithm.1 We present fast, accurate methods of taking numerical Laplace transforms of the source/sink solutions that make the computations reasonably fast and efficient. The proposed methodology can be extended to any system (infinite or bounded) in which the Laplace-space solution can be written easily in terms of integrals of real-space source/sink functions, including production at constant bottomhole pressure, wellbore storage effects, or naturally fractured systems. We demonstrate the applicability of the method by modeling branching channels and channel/splay systems.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.274
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & EngineeringSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207