MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020418499 · doi:10.2118/162720-ms

Recent Achievements Within E-Line Milling

2012· article· en· W2020418499 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anthony MacLeod, James Greenlee, Kristine Henriques

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTorquePetroleum engineeringMechanical engineeringLine (geometry)EngineeringAutomotive engineeringComputer scienceMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Since the concept of milling obstructions on electric line (e-line) was introduced in 2005, operators around the world have applied this technique successfully removing downhole valves, plugs, scales, cement and nipple profiles achieving cost-effective and time-efficient interventions. Recently, a series of e-line milling operations were performed to remove repeater-sub and ball-seat restrictions in oil producing horizontal wellbores located in Southeast Saskatchewan. The low pressure reservoirs favored intervention technologies that did not require excessive hydrostatic head. Operators have traditionally used nitrogen mixed with water to prevent damage to the reservoir and to maintain circulation; however, this reduces the amount of torque that can be achieved at the bit, and causes stalling and sticking issues. Using a combination of tractor and milling technology on e-line in these wells provided the required torque for milling with a steady and constant weight on bit throughout the wellbore for removal of ball seat restrictions. This paper presents the latest achievements within e-line milling in Canada. The paper will discuss best practices of date as well as a discussion of e-line milling challenges through three case studies in Canada.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Canadian Unconventional Resources ConferenceSame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207