MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982575867 · doi:10.2118/149448-ms

Reactive Thermal Reservoir Simulation: Hydrogen Sulphide Production in SAGD

2011· article· en· W1982575867 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

VenueCanadian Unconventional Resources Conference · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphaltOil sandsSolubilityHydrogenViscosityPetroleum engineeringChemistryHeat transferChemical engineeringSteam injectionCarbon dioxideThermalThermodynamicsMaterials scienceGeologyOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In SAGD, steam is injected into a bitumen bearing oil sands formation. Steam temperature ranges from about 200 to 260°C and at these temperatures, bitumen undergoes aquathermolysis yielding acid gases such as hydrogen sulphide and carbon dioxide. SAGD simulation models in the literature often account for spatial heterogeneity of the geology and oil composition and heat transfer, multiphase flow, gas solubility effects, and viscosity variations with temperature, however, none account for the chemistry of SAGD. Here, we consider aquathermolysis reactions to understand the reactive zones in the SAGD process and how the process generates acid gases via aquathermolysis. The results show that SAGD is both a physical and chemical-reactive process.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.245
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