Geophysical monitoring in the IEA GHG weyburn‐midale CO 2 monitoring and storage project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PreviousNext No AccessSEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2008Geophysical monitoring in the IEA GHG weyburn‐midale CO 2 monitoring and storage projectAuthors: D. J. WhiteD. J. WhiteGeological Survey of Canada, Ottawahttps://doi.org/10.1190/1.3063936 SectionsAboutPDF/ePub ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail Abstract A progress report is presented for geophysical monitoring activities within the IEA Weyburn‐Midale CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project.Permalink: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3063936FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByJoint 3D processing of active and passive seismic data12 August 2010 | Geophysical Prospecting, Vol. 58, No. 5A comparison of passive seismic monitoring of fracture stimulation from water and CO2 injectionJames P. Verdon, J.-Michael Kendall, and Shawn C. Maxwell22 April 2010 | GEOPHYSICS, Vol. 75, No. 3Three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic and magnetotelluric joint inversionGeophysical Journal International, Vol. 178, No. 3Structural, compositional, and process controls on the dynamic mass partitioning and spatial distribution of CO2 trapping mechanisms: Influence on isolation performanceEnergy Procedia, Vol. 1, No. 1 SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2008ISSN (print):1052-3812 ISSN (online):1949-4645Copyright: 2008 Pages: 3713 publication data© 2008 Copyright © 2008 Society of Exploration GeophysicistsPublisher:Society of Exploration Geophysicists HistoryPublished: 15 Dec 2008 CITATION INFORMATION D. J. White, (2008), "Geophysical monitoring in the IEA GHG weyburn‐midale CO 2 monitoring and storage project," SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts : 2846-2849. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3063936 Plain-Language Summary PDF DownloadLoading ...
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".