MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004549148 · doi:10.2118/97669-ms

Optimizing the Blowdown of Wizard Lake

2005· article· en· W2004549148 on OpenAlexaff
Peter G. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE International Improved Oil Recovery Conference in Asia Pacific · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsImperial Oil (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoiler blowdownPetroleum engineeringWizardEnvironmental scienceFlood mythHydrology (agriculture)GeologyComputer scienceGeotechnical engineeringGeomorphologyOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Wizard Lake D3 A pool went to blowdown in 2003, after achieving 86 % oil recovery from a vertical hydrocarbon miscible flood scheme. This paper describes some of the optimizations leading up to blowdown to increase gas sales and, in the initial stages of blowdown, to increase oil sales. A novel enhanced gas recovery scheme is also discussed, in which aquifer influx is diverted to another depleted pool through a horizontal well.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE International Improved Oil Recovery Conference in Asia PacificSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207