Enhanced Heavy Oil Recovery on Depleted Long Core System by CH4 and CO2
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper describes a laboratory study of potential post-cold production strategies for heavy oil reservoirs. The tests were conducted on two primarily depleted long core systems (glassbeads core and sandpack core). The glassbeads core is 18.2 m in length with higher permeability (11.8 Darcy) and the sandpack core is 18.5 m long with lower permeability (1.9 Darcy). Both core systems were recharged by CH4 injection followed by a depletion step similar to the cold production experiment. Both cores were then exposed to a single cycle of CO2 injection, soaking and production. This work aims at further understanding the heavy oil solution gas drive mechanism. Furthermore, the study aims at assessing methane and carbon dioxide recharging as a potential recovery method for heavy oil reservoirs, and at establishing a base line for comparison against each other. Results of this study indicate that CH4 and CO2 recharge processes give an additional 8% and 9% OOIP recovery for the glassbeads core and the sandpack core, respectively. Since the cold production for the glassbeads core (22.2% OOIP) was high, the low recharge recoveries may be pessimistic. However, for the sandpack core, the recharge recovery appears more optimistic with almost similar recovery to that of cold production (about 10.2% OOIP).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it