MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086550797 · doi:10.2118/166401-ms

Industry Trends Utilizing Larger Diameter Coiled Tubing for Extended Reach Operations in Northwestern Canada

2013· article· en· W2086550797 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lemuel Edillon

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoiled tubingDirectional drillingDrillingCompletion (oil and gas wells)Computer scienceGeologyPetroleum engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Coiled tubing (CT) operations in Canada have evolved significantly due to advancements in horizontal, multi-stage fracturing. This evolution has caused a shift from using smaller diameter tubing (31.75 mm to 50.8 mm) less than 3,000 m in length to using larger diameter tubing (60.3 mm to 73.0 mm) with lengths over 6,000 m. The preference for larger diameter CT is a result of operators drilling longer lateral lengths to stimulate as many zones as economically possible. To illustrate recent trends in Canadian CT operations, statistics from the past 10 years of horizontal drilling are briefly analyzed followed by an examination of operational data from a leading CT service provider. The surface equipment and CT string design required to perform these operations is also reviewed. Three recent case studies of CT milling operations in Northwestern Canada are discussed to highlight the importance of purpose-built equipment and accurate string selection in today's horizontal market. The industry trend to larger CT is significant because CT capability has become a key component in the overall feasibility and economic evaluation of extended reach, multi-stage horizontal wells.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Annual Technical Conference and ExhibitionSame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207