MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998754983 · doi:10.2118/163855-ms

Asset Development Drivers in the Bakken and Three Forks

2013· article· en· W1998754983 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bilu Cherian, Chris M. Nichols, Maraden Panjaitan, Jayanth Krishnamurthy, Jason Sitchler

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityProduction (economics)InfillDrillingComputer scienceAsset (computer security)Petroleum engineeringEngineeringGeologyCivil engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Home to one of the largest North American deposits discovered in the last few decades, the Bakken, spanning 200,000 square miles along the borders of Saskatchewan, North Dakota and Montana is rivaling some of the largest proven reserves. As the use of long horizontal wells and multi-stage fracturing technology has significantly increased productivity and activity in the basin, the challenges associated with infill-completions, depletion and controlled fracture growth must be addressed to ensure efficient and effective practices, encouraging long-term planning without hindering investment. In this paper, models are built to replicate well performance (fracturing and production-numerical & rate-transient) and to understand the impact of key technologies (multi-stage/completion type and multi-laterals) across the basin to demonstrate why completion strategies must be modified based on reservoir quality and stress state. Confusion between the success of sliding sleeves/plug and-perf and what drives the optimal number of stages is also addressed using fracture modeling and production modeling with emphasis on key parameters (fracture length, connectivity, number of fractures) influencing productivity. The recent focus on data acquisition and modeling in the Three Forks has presented a range of challenges and opportunities due to the laminations in this reservoir. Log up-scaling methods and simulator engines were crucial to modeling and thus evaluating propagation behavior. This paper also presents how the use of data gathering (log, routine and specialized core) and modeling has enabled us to understand how in-fill drilling can alter drainage patterns and influence production success.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology ConferenceSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207