MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010886589 · doi:10.2118/147529-ms

The Use of Rate Transient Analysis Modeling to Quantify Uncertainties in Commingled Tight Gas Production Forecasting and Decline Analysis Parameters in the Alberta Deep Basin

2011· article· en· W2010886589 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Unconventional Resources Conference · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsShell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringProduction (economics)Tight gasTransient (computer programming)Structural basinPermeability (electromagnetism)Transient flowNatural gas fieldMonte Carlo methodTransient analysisBoundary value problemBoundary (topology)Environmental scienceFlow (mathematics)Production rateGeologyEconometricsComputer scienceMechanicsHydraulic fracturingMathematicsStatisticsEngineeringIndustrial engineeringNatural gasTransient responseGeomorphologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The evaluation of Expected Ultimate Recovery (EUR) for tight gas wells has generally relied upon the Arps equation for Decline Curve Analysis (DCA) as a popular approach. However, it is typical in tight gas reservoirs to have limited production history that has yet to reach boundary-dominated flow due to the low permeability of such systems. Commingled production makes the situation even more complicated with multi-boundary behavior. When suitable analogues are not available, Rate Transient Analysis (RTA) can play an important role to justify DCA assumptions for production forecasting. The Deep Basin East field has been developed with hydraulically fractured vertical wells through commingled production from multiple formations since 2002. To evaluate potential of this field, DCA type curves for various areas were established according to well performance and geological trending. Multiple segment DCA methodology demonstrated reasonable forecasts, in which one Arps equation is used to describe the rapidly decreasing transient period in early time, and another for boundary-dominated flow. However, a limitation of this approach is the uncertainty of the forecast in the absence of extended production data as the EUR can be sensitive to adjustments in some assumed DCA parameters of the second segment. In this paper, we used RTA to assess reservoir and fracture properties in multiple layers and built RTA type well models around which uncertainty analyses were performed. The distributions of the model properties were then used in Monte Carlo analysis to forecast production and define uncertainty ranges for EUR and DCA parameters. The resulting forecasts and EUR distribution from RTA modeling generally support the DCA assumptions used for the type curves for corresponding areas of the field. The study also showed how the contribution from the various commingled layers changes with time. The proposed workflow provides a fit-for-purpose way to quantify uncertainties in tight gas production forecasting especially in cases when production history is limited and field-level numerical simulation is not practicable.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.143 · 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