MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066285910 · doi:10.2118/110926-pa

Updating the Geomechanical Model and Calibrating Pore Pressure From 3D Seismic Using Data From the Gnu-1 Well, Dampier Subbasin, Australia

2009· article· en· W2066285910 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian White, Brett Mclntyre, David Castillo, Julie Kowan, Marian Magee, C. Ward, P. M. O'Shea

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsApache (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyWirelineDrillingPore water pressureWell loggingGeomechanicsContext (archaeology)Logging while drillingBoreholeSeismologyPetroleum engineering3d modelWellborePetrologyGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A post-mortem analysis of the Gnu-1 well was conducted to help us to understand drilling experiences in the context of the pore-pressure and stress profiles. The post-mortem involved a review of the drilling experiences and an analysis of circumferential acoustic scanning tool (CAST) image data, wireline-log data, and the logging-while-drilling (LWD) data. This information was used to refine and verify a geomechanical model (i.e., in-situ stress, pore pressure, and rock-mechanical properties) in the vicinity of the Gnu-1 well. Of prime concern was the verification of the predrill pore-pressure prediction previously undertaken using 3D-seismic-velocity data and offset-well data. Wellbore-failure and natural-fracture analyses were integral parts of the post-mortem. Wellbore breakouts seen in the image data allowed the pore pressure in the 8.5-in. hole section of Well Gnu-1 to be constrained. Modeling using image data collected in the Athol formation indicates that the pore pressure does not increase as rapidly as was estimated in the predrill study. Pore pressures in the North Rankin formation and in deeper formations were consistent with the predrill study. The geomechanical model was able to explain the losses seen in the Athol formation in Well Gnu-1 when using the mud weights experienced by the open hole at the time of drilling.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & EngineeringSame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207