Step Change In Time Efficiency Using An Innovative Leap-Frog Rig System In Yemen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Yemen Masila Block 14 has been actively explored and developed since 1987 by Operator Canadian Nexen Petroleum Yemen (formerly Canadian Occidental Petroleum Yemen), and partners Occidental Petroleum and Consolidated Contractors (Oil & Gas) Company. Previous drilling optimisation initiatives have reduced typical well drilling times at Masila from over 30 days on early wells to 14 days in 1999. Presently, a leap-frog drilling rig system is being used to reduce drilling operations time on development oil producer and water injection wells even further. Comprising of two complete drilling rig units plus a partial drilling rig system, it is an excellent example of cooperation between Operator and Contractor to achieve a win-win situation. The initial and primary reason for use of this drilling rig system was to reduce the rig out/move/rig up time spent between wells by the drilling rig packages. A more recent, although equally as important initiative, has seen the leap-frog rig utilized to drill the well surface holes, run and cement surface casing strings, nipple up and pressure test blowout preventers, and run the next hole section drilling BHA in the well ready for drill out. On average, use of this drilling rig system has saved 2.5 rig days per well compared to the utilization of conventional drilling rig systems at Masila. During an annual 75 well development drilling program with a 60% leap-frog drilling rig system utilization, approximately 112 rig days can be saved. This enables an additional eight wells to be drilled each year, assuming a 14 day well spud to spud drilling time (realistic for 6500 foot development wells at Masila).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".