MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003203347 · doi:10.2118/137936-ms

Relationship Between the Hydraulic Fracture and Observed Microseismicity in the Bossier Sands, Texas

2010· article· en· W2003203347 on OpenAlexaff
A. Guest, A. Settari

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Unconventional Resources and International Petroleum Conference · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroseismGeologyHydraulic fracturingPermeability (electromagnetism)Coalescence (physics)Induced seismicityPetroleum engineeringGeotechnical engineeringSeismologyPetrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the past years, an increased effort was directed to improving our understanding of hydrofracturing by microseismic monitoring and analysis. We are developing a numerical method that would predict microseismicity occurring during hydrofracturing and the influence of fracturing on the permeability of the reservoir. The core of our technique is a representative pre-fractured volume of the reservoir that deforms locally and allows for the coalescence of deformation as the stress reequilibrates. Such an approach allows not only for implementation of the geological and seismic information on the scale of the representative volume but also to follow the deformation at the scale of the complete hydrofracture. We apply this technique to the hydrofracturing of the Bossier sandstone. The main goal is to predict observed microseismicity and permeability changes of the reservoir based on the modeled strains. The results show that the distribution of microseismicity is dependent on the regional stress state and the heterogeneity of the stimulated domain. If the permeability is calculated from the strains developing in the reservoir during the treatment, permeability will increase mostly in the areas of active fracturing. The next step is to fully couple the poroelasticity and the geomechanical response and to fit the model to the engineering parameters during the treatment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Unconventional Resources and International Petroleum ConferenceSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207