MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039920821 · doi:10.2523/iptc-10785-ms

History and Prospect of Natural Gas Development in China

2005· article· en· W2039920821 on OpenAlexaff
Fengjiang Wang, Guang Jie Zhang, Ying Zhang, Lianzhu Cong

Bibliographic record

VenueAll Days · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural gas fieldNatural gasChinaDrillingYield (engineering)Tarim basinNatural gas industryStructural basinStage (stratigraphy)Sichuan basinGeologyPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeographyEngineeringPaleontologyGeochemistryMaterials scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Along with the discovery of gas fields and the increase of gas reserve, China's natural gas industry has been entering a new period of rapid growth. The gas yield has witnessed a steady increase in the last decade. It could be expected that great progress will be made in both exploration and development. In this paper, the history of natural gas industry was reviewed, and the achievements were summarized for every stage of development. The prospect forecast was proposed in gas exploration and development. The reserve increase and gas yield trend was suggested, indicating the rapid growth trend will sustain, and natural gas will play an even more important role in the energy mixture in China. Historical review of gas exploration and development Exploration. Gas exploration has seen 5 stages of development (Figure 1). Stage 1 (Before 1956): There was no new gas fields found and gas reserve remained a low level (around 0.2 bcm). Stage 2 (1956 – 1976): In this period, gas reserve saw a relatively low increase, and most reserve was obtained in Sichuan basin. To the statistics, the quantity of reserve increase was 121 bcm, of which over 70 percent was that of Sichuan basin. Stage 3 (1977 – 1989): In this phase, besides a number of small-scaled gas reservoirs were found in Sichuan basin, a series of breakthrough was achieved in such basins as Tarim, Ordos, Qaidam, Ying-Qiong, East sea, etc.. Many gas-bearing structures were identified through exploration well-drilling. In particular, field Ya 13-1 in Ying-Qiong basin was the largest gas field in China at that time, and it was the first high productivity and high reserve abundance offshore gas field in China. Stage 4 (1990–1999): A series of important breakthroughs in gas exploration were achieved and the natural gas reserves saw a rapid growth. With the stable progress of natural gas exploration and development in Sichuan Basin, three new natural gas areas, Tarim basin, Ordos basin and Tsaidam basin, came into being. In this period, gas reserve of 950 bcm was proved. A number of large fields found or proved in this period (such as Dukouhe, Wubaiti, Shapingchang in Sichan basin, Jingbian, Yulin in Ordos basin, Kela 2, Yaha, Yingmaili in Tarim basin) became major gas producers and supply sources.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAll DaysSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207