MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045830437 · doi:10.1306/08270706133

Coal reservoir saturation: Impact of temperature and pressure

2007· article· en· W2045830437 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCoal Properties and Utilization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyCoalSaturation (graph theory)Petroleum engineeringMining engineeringArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Methane adsorption isotherms measured for a series of coals with varying rank at a wide range of temperatures and pressures allows the prediction of the change in sorption capacity as a function of tectonic history. Changes in sorption capacity in response to declining pressure and temperature associated with uplift may increase or decrease the capacity of the coal and, if the coal is initially saturated, result in excess gas or a deficiency of gas (undersaturation). Assuming reasonable geothermal and pressure gradients, our data indicate that the sorption capacity will generally decrease with uplift and associated exhumation, suggesting that an initially gas-saturated coal will desorb gas during uplift of the reservoir. The desorbed gas would be available for migration and/or, potentially, resaturation of an undersaturated coal. Our results argue against the generally accepted theory that undersaturation of coal reservoirs results from an increase in the sorption capacity with uplift except for coals at such high pressures that the isotherms are essentially flat or for very high pressure and geothermal gradients.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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