MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015627488 · doi:10.1190/tle31040387.1

Recent production and drilling success of the Stag oil field from multidisciplinary evaluation of OBC seismic data

2012· article· en· W2015627488 on OpenAlexaff
Paul F. Anderson, Paul Bingaman, Kyle S. Graves, Fred Fernandes, Fiona O’Sullivan, Sam Betts

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsApache (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubseaGeologyPetroleum engineeringDrillingInversion (geology)Seismic surveyOil fieldSubmarine pipelineMultidisciplinary approachOil explorationSeismologyMining engineeringStructural basinPaleontologyOceanographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Originally discovered in 1993, the Stag oil field, on the North West Shelf of Western Australia, has proven to be both a prolific and complicated reservoir since production began in 1998. To date, more than 56 million barrels have been produced, in addition to significant volumes of water and glauconite, which has resulted in complex changes to the reservoir over time as the field has produced. Because the reservoir is shallow, at 680 m true vertical depth subsea (TVDSS) with shallow carbonates causing noise issues and imaging challenges, Stag Field remained largely invisible on seismic data. To address these issues, a 220-km2 4C-3D ocean-bottom cable survey (OBC) was acquired in early 2008. Subsequent processing and interpretation of these data, including a joint multicomponent inversion, have resulted in drilling six successful new wells with additional wells currently underway and planned in the near future.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207