MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014811189 · doi:10.2523/iptc-11971-ms

Characterization of Fracture Dynamic Parameters to Simulate Naturally Fractured Reservoirs

2008· article· en· W2014811189 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Petroleum Technology Conference · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsHusky Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFracture (geology)Permeability (electromagnetism)GeologyPetroleum engineeringPorosityGeotechnical engineeringMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fractures identification is essential during exploration, drilling and well completion of naturally fractured reservoirs since they have a significant impact on flow contribution. There are different methods to characterize these systems based on formation properties and fluid flow behaviour such as logging and testing. Pressure-transient testing has long been recognized as a reservoir characterization tool. Although welltest analysis is a recommended technique for fracture evaluation, but its use is still not well understood. Analysis of pressure transient data provides dynamic reservoir properties such as average permeability, fracture storativity and fracture conductivity. An infusion of geological knowledge helps reducing uncertainty associated with any well-test interpretation. The static properties of naturally fractured reservoirs such as fracture aperture, fracture spacing and fracture porosity can be obtained from processing of Image Log data. Simulation of naturally fractured reservoirs needs defining fracture permeability, shape factor and fracture porosity in the fracture model. However, in most simulation studies, due to high uncertainties in estimating fracture permeability and shape factor values, these parameters are initially assumed in the model and they are usually tuned during history matching which can be time consuming and also affect other history match parameters. Reservoir simulation results and predictions might be inaccurate if the values of fracture properties in the model are not reliable. This paper shows using image log data associated with welltest analysis in order to determine dynamic fracture parameters such as fracture permeability and shape factor for reservoir simulation. In this study, sensitivity analysis has also been performed on fracture permeability, fracture porosity and shape factor in a real simulation model to show importance of accurate determination of fracture parameters. Introduction Naturally fractured reservoirs differ from homogeneous reservoirs from many points of view: geological, petrophysical, production and economics. We may think of fractured reservoirs as initially homogeneous systems whose physical properties have been deformed or altered during their deposition. As a consequence, it is not always easy to match the behavior of these systems, specifically to forecast their production during simulation.

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)0.000
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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.847

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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