Volumes and Areas of Pendular Rings With Non-Zero Contact Angle in Tight Gas Sands Dominated by Contractional Fractures and Slot Porosity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Contractional natural fractures and slot porosity play and will continue to play an important role in commercial gas production from tight sands. The process that leads to these types of porosities starts with deposition of sand grains. As the grains get progressively buried inelastically the net stress increases continuously. Eventually the sand grains reach their maximum depth of burial and at this stage the vast majority of the porosity and permeability has been destroyed. Uplift leads to a cooling effect and thermo-elastic stresses that create contractional fractures and slot porosity. Throughout these processes the sand grains get deformed and as a result there are continuous variations in volumes and areas of pendular rings, which lead to variations in porosities, permeabilities and water saturations. This paper discusses models that can be used for estimating these variations for zero and non-zero contact angles in tight gas sands. The subject is significant because historically oil and gas companies have gone, rightly, after tectonic fractures associated with folding and faulting in tight gas sands. The present work discusses a different possibility as the contractional fractures discussed above are not restricted to areas dominated by major tectonic events.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".