MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979688148 · doi:10.2118/141650-pa

Optimal Parametric Design for Water-Alternating-Gas (WAG) Process in a CO2-Miscible Flooding Reservoir

2010· article· en· W1979688148 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceParametric statisticsWater injection (oil production)Tabu searchOil fieldOil productionWater floodingInjectorEngineeringMathematicsMathematical optimizationStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A pragmatic method has been developed to efficiently design the production-injection parameters to optimize the water-alternating-gas (WAG) performance in a field-scale CO2-miscible flooding project. The net present value (NPV) is selected as the objective function, while the controlling variables are chosen to be the injection rates, ratios of gas slug size to water slug size (WAG ratio) and cycle time (i.e., the injection time for each gas or water slug) for the injectors and bottomhole pressures (BHPs) for the producers. A hybrid technique, which integrates the orthogonal array (OA) and Tabu technique into the genetic algorithm (GA), is then developed and employed to determine the optimum WAG production-injection parameters. Sensitivity analysis of the WAG parameters on oil recovery is conducted and a field case is finally presented to demonstrate the successful application of the newly developed technique.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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