MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059087187 · doi:10.2118/163825-ms

Interpretation of Closure Stress in the Montney Shale Using PTA Based Techniques

2013· article· en· W2059087187 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringInterpretation (philosophy)Closure (psychology)Plot (graphics)Oil shaleGeologyWellboreDerivative (finance)MathematicsAlgorithmComputer scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Montney formation In NE British Columbia and NW Alberta is one of the largest economically feasible resource plays in North America. It contains both gas and liquids rich light ends. Horizontal multi-staged fracturing is the method for developing this vast resource. Prior to hydraulically fracturing the wellbore, the toe stage is frequently mini-fraced to obtain reservoir and geomechanical properties. Interpreting these mini-fracs, commonly referred to as DFIT’s (Diagnostic Fracture Injection Tests), has proved to be a challenge using traditional combination G Function and square root plots. It is always important to ensure that all data being analyzed is associated with a reservoir response and not wellbore behavior, surface operational interruptions or data quality issues. Some of these challenges can be overcome when using some new techniques for mini-frac Fall-off analysis, which will be discussed in this paper. Various pressure transient analyses (PTA) based interpretation techniques have been introduced to the industry over the last couple of years for the determination of closure pressure (Bachman et al. 2012, Mohamed et al. 2011 and Marongiu-Porcu et al. 2011). From a theoretical viewpoint, unification of the fields of traditional PTA and mini-frac interpretation has been achieved. We recommend that the standard PTA based log-log derivative plot using equivalent time is included in the analysis of mini-frac / fall-off tests. This plot is rarely, if ever, used in current interpretations. For mini-frac interpretation, the starting point should now be the standard PTA based log-log derivative plot. The primary pressure derivative (dp/dt) curve should also be added to the log-log derivative plot as an independent flow regime identification technique. This now gives two independent flow regime identification techniques in one plot. The power of the primary pressure derivative to enhance the interpretation of closure and flow regime identification will be illustrated. Subsequently, flow regime specific plots can be constructed to enhance the interpretation. A number of field examples from the Montney formation in the Farrell Creek area of NE British Columbia are illustrated using a systematic PTA interpretation methodology demonstrating multiple closure events, high fracture extension pressure gradients of 34.0 kPa/m, non-Darcy pressure derivative diagnostics and observation of complex fracture orientation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.862

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.220 · 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