MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084371996 · doi:10.2118/102441-pa

Technologies for Arctic Offshore Exploration and Development

2007· article· en· W2084371996 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Projects Facilities & Construction · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticSubmarine pipelinePermafrostOceanographyIcebergSea iceMarine engineeringGeologyEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Exploration and development of hydrocarbon reserves in the arctic seas are challenged by a harsh environment including the presence of ice and icebergs, permafrost, low temperatures, and extended periods of darkness. Remoteness and ecological considerations make activities in the arctic even more difficult. Advanced technologies, nontraditional technical solutions, and flawless execution are required to make any major project in the arctic a success. Understanding the difficulties associated with implementing an offshore project in the arctic comes with experience. In ExxonMobil's case, this is a result of 40 years of arctic field operations and associated research. This paper discusses the arctic technologies developed to support ExxonMobil exploration and development activities in the Arctic seas. ExxonMobil's Arctic offshore activity started in 1966 with the installation of the ice-resistant Granite Point offshore platform, which is still producing oil in Cook Inlet, Alaska. Since then, ExxonMobil has constructed and drilled from artificial islands in shallow-arctic waters; drilled in iceberg-prone regions off Greenland, Canada, and Norway; designed and installed the first icebergresistant gravity-based platform on the Grand Banks; installed an ice-resistant production platform and the first in-ice Single Point Mooring (SPM) offshore loading facility offshore Sakhalin Island; and continued to develop methodology to provide rational design criteria for ice-resistant production platforms. Development of design criteria and the selection of the most reliable and costeffective technical solutions for arctic offshore projects required data from numerous field expeditions, model test programs, field measurements, and observations from existing offshore structures. These studies were carried out under the supervision of ExxonMobil research staff. Arctic marine transportation systems are also an important element for many offshore and near-shore projects in remote areas where the construction of export pipelines is prohibitively expensive. The 1969–1970 Manhattan tanker trials in the US and Canadian arctic and the 2002 Primorye trials in the Tatar Strait have helped ExxonMobil develop safe and reliable technologies for hydrocarbon transportation in ice-infested waters.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.194 · 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