MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061378148 · doi:10.2118/88472-ms

Determination of Gas Permeability of Tight Reservoir Cores without Using Klinkenberg Correlation

2004· article· en· W2061378148 on OpenAlexaff
Shuliang Li, Mingzhe Dong, Liming Dai, Zhaowen Li, Xuefeng Pan

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermeability (electromagnetism)Tight gasRelative permeabilitySlip (aerodynamics)MechanicsCore sampleMaterials sciencePetroleum engineeringGeologyCore (optical fiber)ChemistryThermodynamicsComposite materialPorosityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper reports the laboratory measurements of gas permeability for tight reservoir core samples with various upstream, downstream, and average pressures. Measurements are conducted with backpressures from atmospheric pressure up to 9.3 MPa. It is found that exerting a backpressure at the outlet of the core sample can effectively reduce the gas slip effect and improve the permeability measurements. When the backpressure reaches a certain level, defined as the minimum backpressure, the gas slip effect can be eliminated so that non-slip gas permeability can be obtained without using Klinkenberg correlation. When the backpressure exceeds the minimum backpressure the measured non-slip permeability is a constant for a given core sample. From this finding, a method of directly determining gas permeability of tight reservoir cores is provided. The experimental results also indicate that the minimum backpressure increases with decrease in permeability of tight reservoir cores. The concept and technique can be applied in the measurement of effective/relative gas permeability in multiphase systems where Klinkenberg correlation cannot be used to correct the gas slip effect.

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 score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations14
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and ExhibitionSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207