MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2035541800 · doi:10.1190/1.2792448

Integrated pore‐pressure prediction in Gunnison field

2007· article· en· W2035541800 on OpenAlexaff
Alfred Liaw, T. K. Kan, Nicole Kennedy, K. E. Belk, Frederic Gallice

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsMira Geoscience (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField (mathematics)Materials scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An integrated pore pressure prediction technique has been applied to the Gunnison field, in the Garden Banks area of Gulf of Mexico, for the purpose of understanding the hydrodynamic system of sub-surface hydrocarbon distributions. The pore pressure prediction technique presented in this paper is based on the integration of a 3D high resolution and high density velocity field derived from seismic PSTM gathers and acoustic impedance inverted from a calibrated 3D seismic migration volume. The pore pressure gradient, excess pressure, minimum horizontal effective stress volumes resulted from the integrated technique reveal higher resolution than those generated from the conventional approach which is simply based on a 3D seismic velocity field. The high resolution pressure attributes in the Gunnison field exhibit a good correlation between the occurrences of hydrocarbon reservoirs with pressure gradient regression, relatively lower excess pressure and high effective stress intervals. The pressure attributes derived simply from 3D seismic velocity field has a tendency of unable to reveal a true subsurface pressure distribution.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques→French-language works237,207→