Quantitative estimate of fracture density variations in the Nordegg with azimuthal AVO and curvature: A case study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the accuracy of surface seismic attributes in predicting fracture density variations within the Nordegg Formation in west central Alberta. We know from core, drill samples, well-log, and drilling data that the Nordegg zone is fractured to some degree. These fractures are of interest because the reservoir has very low permeability, and therefore natural fractures may materially affect well performance. 3D surface seismic techniques such as amplitude variation with azimuth or azimuthal AVO (AVAz), variation of velocity with azimuth (VVAz), curvature, and coherence techniques are all tools that have been used to predict fractures in a qualitative fashion. In this study, we wanted to understand how well these attributes predicted the reservoir quality in a quantitative fashion. Previous quantitative studies have used image log orientation data or estimated ultimate recoveries (EUR) in vertical wells as validation data. The conclusiveness of these studies has been subject to several problems: firstly, the limited sample statistics provided by vertical wells applied to the validation of lateral variations, and secondly by the potential nonuniqueness of the EUR to fracture density relationship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it