MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051603625 · doi:10.2118/75681-ms

A Comparison of Results of Three Different CO2 Energized Frac Fluids: A Case History

2002· article· en· W2051603625 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael G. Tulissi, Richard E. May

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Gas Technology Symposium · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Natural Resources
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Natural gas fieldBlanketPetroleum engineeringScale (ratio)Environmental scienceEngineeringEconomicsNatural gasWaste managementPhysicsMicroeconomicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Over the past several years shallow gas reservoirs in southern Alberta have often been fracture-treated utilizing a blanket design, with the primary objective of minimizing completion costs on these marginal wells. Strategies such as simplifying logistics to take advantage of economies of scale, and reducing fluid and gas requirements have been successful in achieving this objective. This paper discusses a pilot project, which examined ways to enhance the economics of both the Medicine Hat and Milk River formations. The ultimate goal of the project was to improve overall economics by increasing production, rather than relying solely on reduced costs. Successful trials were to provide justification for future down spacing of the field. The impact of varying the ratio of liquid CO2 relative to base fluid in twelve wells was observed. Initial production results have proved exciting and strongly suggest the possibility of doubling production rates in the long-term.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Gas Technology SymposiumSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207