A Complete Petrophysical-Evaluation Method for Tight Formations From Drill Cuttings Only in the Absence of Well Logs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The amount of tight-formation petrophysical work conducted at present in horizontal wells and the examples available in the literature are limited to only those wells that have complete data sets. This is very important. But the reality is that in the vast majority of horizontal wells, the data required for detailed analyses are quite scarce. Petrophysical evaluation in the absence of well logs and cores can now be considered owing to the possibility of measuring both the permeability and porosity of drill cuttings. This is essential because the application of the successive correlations used throughout the paper is based on porosity and permeability data. To try to alleviate the data-scarcity problem, a new method is presented for complete petrophysical evaluation derived from information that can be extracted from drill cuttings in the absence of well logs. The cuttings data include porosity and permeability. The gamma ray and any other logs, if available, can help support the interpretation. However, the methodology is built strictly on data extracted from cuttings and can be used for horizontal, slanted, and vertical wells. The method is illustrated with the use of a tight gas formation in the Deep basin of the western Canada sedimentary basin (WCSB). However, it also has direct application in the case of liquids. The method is shown to be a powerful petrophysical tool because it allows quantitative evaluation of water saturation, pore-throat aperture, capillary pressure, flow units, porosity (or cementation) exponent m, true-formation resistivity, and distance to a water table (if present). Also, the method allows one to distinguish the contributions from viscous and diffusion-like flow in tight gas formations. The method further allows the construction of Pickett plots without previous availability of well logs, and it assumes the existence of intervals at irreducible water saturation, which is the case of many tight formations currently under exploitation. It is concluded that drill cuttings are a powerful direct source of information that allows complete and practical evaluation of tight reservoirs in which well logs are scarce. The uniqueness and practicality of this quantitative procedure originate from the fact that it starts only from the laboratory analysis of drill cuttings—something that has not been performed in the past.
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".