Carbonate karst reservoirs of the Tarim Basin, northwest China: Types, features, origins, and implications for hydrocarbon exploration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Karst reservoirs are important exploration targets in marine carbonates of hydrocarbon-bearing basins around the world. In the Tarim Basin of northwest China, four types of carbonate karst reservoirs were delineated using data from more than 200 wells, including cores, thin sections, wireline logs, drilling logs, and production data; these were supplemented with seismic and other data. The four types of karst reservoirs described were all formed by meteoric water circulation but not limited in the vadose or phreatic zones, including buried tower karst, interlayer karst, overlying-aquiclude confining karst, and fault-related karst. Buried tower karst occurred in the carbonate successions underneath a regional unconformity (buried tower area), resembling the active karsting in the Guilin Region of South China. Interlayer karst developed during a relatively shorter exposure period compared with buried tower karst but is also situated on a paleouplift. Overlying-aquiclude confining karst is essentially a by-product and on the fringes of buried tower karst, and though it appears to be distributed evenly below a disconformity, it is not related to the disconformity in origin. Fault-related karst occurred in the carbonate succession of a high steep anticline with faults cutting through aquicludes and into the carbonates; dissolution is concentrated along faults and the crest of the anticline. We studied three previously undocumented types of karst and proved that karst reservoirs in the Tarim Basin occur not only in the carbonate succession under a regional unconformity, but also where no significant unconformity is recognized. Similar examples have been found in other basins of China and are expected to occur in other basins worldwide, particularly in areas of complex geologic history.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".