Performance of immiscible and miscible CO<SUB align="right">2 injection process in a tight carbonate reservoir (experimental and simulation approach)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the technical feasibility of CO2 injection in a core sample of a tight carbonate reservoir was investigated under various operating conditions. First, the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) of CO2/oil system was determined to be 1,907 Psia. The effects of the operating pressure as well as the injection flow rate of CO2 on the oil recovery were examined. The results showed that at the operating pressures far below the MMP, the ultimate oil recovery factor is considerably low and increases as the pressure approaches near-miscible condition. When injection pressure was increased to 2,000 Psia, the ultimate oil recovery factor reached 0.81 and further increase in injection pressure did not significantly improve the recovery factor. For injection pressures lower than MMP (i.e., immiscible condition), increasing injection flow rate of CO2 resulted in lower oil recovery, while at the pressures near and above the MMP, the ultimate oil recovery was much less dependent on CO2 injection flow rate. All the test results were simulated using the CMG package, ver. 2011 and attempt was made to history match the experimental results. In this process, relative permeability curves were used as matching parameter. The simulation results were in good agreement with experimental values. [Received: March 12, 2013; Accepted: August 4, 2013]
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".