MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013019021 · doi:10.2118/167477-pa

Semiquantitative Applications of Downhole-Temperature Data in Subsurface Surveillance

2014· article· en· W2013019021 on OpenAlexaff
Xingru Wu, Weibo Sui, Yuanlin Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Production & Operations · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersChina University of Petroleum, BeijingUniversity of Oklahoma
KeywordsSubseaPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceData loggerGeologyRemote sensingGeotechnical engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Permanent downhole-pressure and -temperature gauges have been installed in many intelligent wells worldwide, providing high-resolution and precision surveillance data about the performance of wells and reservoirs. Compared with the pressure data, the temperature data have been underused in the petroleum industry. In this paper, we first examine the measured downhole-temperature variation caused by the Joule-Thomson effect and infer the true reservoir temperature and the skin history from the temperature data. An analytical relationship between the temperature data and the skin is presented. Through the use of this relationship, many purposeful surveillance studies, such as monitoring the skin change of the well, can be conducted. Examples of such studies will be provided and discussed using some deepwater-field data. Furthermore, the downhole temperature can be used to detect whether water breakthrough occurs by means of matrix or fracture through use of the thermal retardation factor. When coupled with the production data and pressure-falloff (PFO) tests, the downhole-temperature data can be used to estimate the water-breakthrough time. The application of this analysis is of practical interest for subsea-well development because of the prohibitive costs and high risks of production logging.

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 score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.255
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Production & OperationsSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207