MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016465616 · doi:10.2118/103178-ms

Complete Decision-Tree Analysis Using Simulation Methods: Illustrated With an Example of Bitumen Production in Alberta Using Steam Injection

2006· article· en· W2016465616 on OpenAlex
David G. Laughton, G. Joe, Michael Paduada, Michael Samis

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

VenueSPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsHusky Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValuation (finance)Computer scienceAsset (computer security)Decision treeContext (archaeology)Operations researchProduction (economics)EngineeringEconomicsArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In September 2003, the SPE held a workshop on the future of asset valuation in corporate asset design and selection process. One suggestion that came out of the workshop was that methods should be developed that will allow the use of decision tree analysis not only in the exploration and appraisal phases of the asset life cycle, but throughout the cycle, and in such a way that the decisions to be analysed are made not only in response to the resolution of geological uncertainty but also in response to the resolution of price and other commercial uncertainty. This will require a significant expansion of the computational technology available to deal in decision tree analysis with complex policy spaces in the face of complex structures of underlying uncertainties. Work has been gong for several years in financial markets to deal similar issues using different subtle combinations of simulation and optimisation methods. Two of these combinations the Longstaff Schwartz method and the stochastic programming method have been applied recently to valuations in the mining industry in situations that are analogous to those faced by the upstream petroleum industry. In this paper, we show how the Longstaff-Schwartz method, as adapted for use in a mining context, may be applied to the analysis of decision-making and value in the development of a bitumen deposit in Alberta using steam injection, where the underlying uncertainties are price movements in the bitumen produced and the natural gas used to produce the steam, and technological and geological uncertainties in the production and cost profiles. The analysis is complicated by the fiscal regime that brings to bear at each time the past price history through a particular form of ring-fenced resource rent royalty.

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 score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.271 · 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