MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062658832 · doi:10.2118/126311-ms

Results From Acid Stimulation in Lloydminster SAGD Applications

2010· article· en· W2062658832 on OpenAlex
Steve Brand

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

VenueSPE International Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsHusky Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringSteam injectionCalcium carbonateDeposition (geology)CarbonateCabin pressurizationWellboreOil productionOil wellCompletion (oil and gas wells)GeologyScale (ratio)InflowEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceChemical engineeringEngineeringMetallurgyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract SAGD (Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage) thermal production of heavy oil in the area surrounding Lloydminster involves the injection of steam and subsequent pressurization of the reservoir. As fluid enters the horizontal producer, the pressure drop results in the deposition of calcium carbonate scale. Scale deposition eventually begins to have a detrimental effect on fluid inflow into the wellbore. In addition to the calcium carbonate scale, the high ashphaltene content of the oil results in a hydrocarbon coating being deposited on the scale. Many options exist to remove the scale/ashphaltene deposit and return the well to prior oil production rates. This paper will review the mechanism believed to cause scale deposition, available chemical and mechanical methods to remove the scale and Husky’s recent successes from treatment of SAGD wells in a sandstone reservoir in the Lloydminster heavy oil area.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.236
Teacher spread0.230 · 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