MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074042057 · doi:10.2118/132371-ms

Surface Microseismic Monitoring of Slick Water and Nitrogen Fracture Stimulations, Arkoma Basin, Oklahoma

2010· article· en· W2074042057 on OpenAlex

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

VenueAll Days · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMicrosemi (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeophoneMicroseismGeologyOil shaleSeismologyFracture (geology)Structural basinSurface waterHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Surface based microseismic monitoring was performed to assess the effectiveness of slick-water and nitrogen fracture stimulations in a horizontal well with a 3500' lateral drilled in the Arkoma Basin of Oklahoma. Water production from this shale as well as the located events from the microseismic monitoring suggested the fracs were not contained in the target formation and contacted foreign water. The observed distribution of microseismic events suggested that planar fractures were created with varying complexity. The azimuths of the produced trends suggested that a strong influence from the pre-existing natural fractures directed the induced fractures. A direct comparison of the slick-water treatment to the nitrogen treatment revealed multiple advantages with the latter, such as more in-zone events, more energy per event, and more complexity in resulting fractures. Introduction The area monitored is located in the Arkoma Basin of Oklahoma, an area where the basin tectonics are inactive, but the weather is not. The surface array used to perform the surface monitoring of the slick-water and nitrogen treatments was designed to locate induced microseismic events by beamforming. The array consisted of 1078 stations of 12 geophones laid out in a radial pattern around the treatment well (Figure1). Although the treatments were two months apart, the array geometry was identical with the exception of removal of 11 stations from the array during the nitrogen treatment. The geophones were buried to a depth of one foot to maximize the signal to noise ratio by reducing the interference of the frequent seasonal rainfall. Cultural sources of noise such as traffic and inherent pad noises were taken into account by surface array design and seismic processing.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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