MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rock physics analysis for time‐lapse seismic at Schiehallion Field, North Sea

2005· article· en· W2039535478 on OpenAlexaff
Mark A. Meadows, Don Adams, Rich Wright, Ali Tura, Steve Cole, David Lumley

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSaturation (graph theory)Igneous petrologyGeologyMineralogyModuliDry gasSoil scienceEngineering geologyVolcanismPhysicsChemistryMathematicsSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Rock physics analysis plays a vital role in time‐lapse seismic interpretation because it provides the link between changes in rock and fluid properties and the resulting seismic data response. In this case study of the Schiehallion Field, we discuss a number of issues that commonly arise in rock physics analyses for time‐lapse studies. We show that: Logarithmic fits of dry bulk (Kdry) and shear (Gdry) moduli vs. effective pressure (Peff) are superior to polynomial fits. 2D surface fits of Kdry and Gdry over porosity (φ) and effective pressure using all the core data simultaneously are more useful and accurate than separate 1D fits over φ and Peff for each individual core. One average set (facies) of Kdry(φ, Peff) and Gdry(φ, Peff) can be chosen to represent adequately the entire Schiehallion reservoir. Saturated velocities and densities modelled by fluid substitution of Kdry(φ, Peff), Gdry(φ, Peff) and the dry bulk density ρdry(φ) compare favourably with well‐log velocities and densities. P‐ and S‐wave impedance values resulting from fluid substitution of Kdry(φ, Peff), Gdry(φ, Peff) and ρdry(φ) show that the largest impedance changes occur for high porosities and low effective pressures. Uncertainties in Kdry(φ, Peff) and Gdry(φ, Peff) derived for individual cores can be used to generate error surfaces for these moduli that represent bounds for quantifying uncertainties in seismic modelling or pressure–saturation inversion.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations22
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical ProspectingSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207