MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027614683 · doi:10.2118/1010-0047-jpt

Integration of Microseismic and Other Post-Fracture Surveillance With Production Analysis: A Tight Gas Study

2010· article· en· W2027614683 on OpenAlex
Dennis Denney

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTight gasMicroseismPetroleum engineeringHydraulic fracturingCoalbed methaneUnconventional oilGeologyFracture (geology)Shale gasTight oilDrillingDirectional drillingPermeability (electromagnetism)ComminutionOil shaleMining engineeringGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringCoal miningCoalMechanical engineeringWaste managementSeismologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article, written by Senior Technology Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of paper SPE 131786, ’Integration of Microseismic and Other Post-Fracture Surveillance With Production Analysis: A Tight Gas Study,’ by C.R. Clarkson, SPE, University of Calgary, and J.J. Beierle, SPE, Talisman Energy, prepared for the 2010 SPE Unconventional Gas Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 23-25 February. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Quantitative production analysis of tight gas reservoirs is a challenge because of complex reservoir characteristics, induced-hydraulic-fracture properties in vertical wells, operational complexities, and data quality. These challenges make extracting reservoir and hydraulic-fracture properties (i.e., fracture half-length, xf, and fracture conductivity) solely from production and flowing-pressure data difficult, often resulting in nonunique answers. Many tight gas reservoirs are exploited with horizontal wells, often stimulated with multiple hydraulic fractures, imparting greater complexity to the analysis. Flow-regime identification, which is critical to correct analysis, becomes more complicated because of the variety of flow regimes that could be encountered in such wells. Introduction Development of tight gas, shale gas, and coalbed methane (collectively referred to as unconventional gas reservoirs) benefits from advances in drilling, completions, and stimulation technology; formation evaluation; and during-/post-stimulation-surveillance technology. Formation-evaluation techniques enable determining critical parameters such as matrix permeability in ultratight rock from cores, and adsorbed- and free-gas content in shale and coalbed methane from cores and cuttings. During-/post-fracture-stimulation-surveillance technology (such as microseismic monitoring) aids identifying the hydraulic-fracture geometry created in unconventional reservoirs (hydraulic-fracture growth), particularly in coals and shales. Predicting hydraulic-fracture geometries is complicated by heterogeneities, such as natural fractures (healed or open) and layering (with associated contrasts in mechanical properties), and in some cases, by nonlinear elastic behavior. Advanced production-analysis techniques, such as production type curves, supplement reservoir and stimulation information obtained from pressure-transient analysis (well testing) in conventional oil and gas reservoirs and even some unconventional reservoirs such as coalbed methane and tight gas. However, applying these methods to tight gas and shale reservoirs that are produced through multifractured horizontal wells has been difficult because of the complexity of the system, poor quality of flowing-pressure and rate data, and the lack of sufficient data to characterize the system fully. Even if the production and flowing-pressure data were of sufficient quality to identify flow regimes, as in pressure-transient analysis, without additional surveillance information, it is difficult to ascertain how the flow regimes relate to the reservoir and hydraulic-fracture system. If the flow regimes are misinterpreted, then the extracted information will be incorrect. A workflow is proposed to improve the quality of information extracted from production-data analysis (PDA) of hydraulically fractured horizontal wells completed in tight gas reservoirs.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.201 · 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