MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077784674 · doi:10.1021/ef050194+

Changes in Type II Kerogen Density as a Function of Maturity:  Evidence from the Kimmeridge Clay Formation

2005· article· en· W2077784674 on OpenAlexaff
K. S. Okiongbo, Andrew C. Aplin, Steve Larter

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKerogenMaturity (psychological)GeologyType (biology)ChemistryGeochemistryMineralogyPaleontologySource rockStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kerogens were purified from 26 samples of the Kimmeridge Clay Formation over the full range of maturities pertinent to petroleum generation. Most samples comprised >90% amorphous organic matter (AOM). Prior to and during the early phase of petroleum generation, kerogen densities range between 1.18 and 1.25 g cm - 3 . During peak and late stage petroleum generation, densities increase to ∼1.35 g cm - 3 as hydrogen indices decrease from ∼350 to 50 mg HC/g C. The data are qualitatively consistent with the loss of alkyl carbon from kerogen to petroleum and the increased aromatization of remaining carbon. The density increase observed for AOM contrasts with the data for vitrinite, which exhibits a decrease in density at maturity levels relevant to petroleum generation. The contrasting behavior of AOM and vitrinite is thought to reflect the differing structural composition of the two kerogen types, most obviously the greater initial aromaticity of vitrinite.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations263
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207