Design, Implementation, and Analysis of Multilayer Pressure Transient Tests in White Rose Field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The White Rose field is located in the Jeanne d’Arc Basin, lying some 350 km off the east coast of Newfoundland. The basin has proven to be the only area off the East Coast of North America with established major oil accumulation potential. The discovery well in the south area of the structure, the E-09, was drilled in 1988 encountering some 300 m continuous sand interval with an oil column of 135 m. Although there was a potentially significant amount of oil distributed in several fault blocks, the productive capacity of future development wells was uncertain based on the five conventional pressure transient tests conducted. Following a 3D seismic program, a delineation program commenced in 1999 and three delineation wells were drilled geologically confirming over 600 MMSTB oil in place in the south. The wells were extensively cored and logged. Two sand intervals in the first well, the L-08, were tested using the conventional pressure transient testing technology. However, it was decided that a multilayer test (MLT) could be employed in the second well, the A-17, leading to significant cost savings when compared with conventional testing. The A-17 well was logged to evaluate the formation as well as the cement bond. Four distinct pay intervals were observed and it was decided that the properties of these layers could be measured by conducting an MLT while also measuring the flow profiles with a Production Logging Tool (PLT). The test was successfully conducted and analyzed. Consequently, the rig time to test the well was reduced by at least 16 days, yielding savings of C$8 million. Given the success of the technique in the second well, the third delineation well, the N-30, was also tested using the MLT technique, again with significant cost savings. This paper discusses the design, implementation and the analysis of MLT's conducted in the A-17 and N-30 wells.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".