MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091282486 · doi:10.2118/2005-079

Life Cycle Management - The Myth Becomes Reality - A Case Study With Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.

2005· article· en· W2091282486 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicModeling, Simulation, and Optimization
Canadian institutionsARC Resources (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyProduct life-cycle managementComputer scienceEngineeringBusinessHistoryMarketingClassics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper is the second in a series of papers covering the spectrum of Life Cycle Management. The first paper provided an approach for the execution of a Life Cycle Management Plan. The approach was based upon a combination of Workflow, Integration and Notification (WIN). Current "best of breed" applications and business processes would be retained and the WIN approach used to "bridge the gaps" in bothbusiness processes and software, the result being proactive communication in the organization and effective management reporting to drive business decisions. This second paper is a case study with Burlington Resources Canada Ltd (BRC). It reviews the solution being implemented around the "Commencement of Production" (from licence / permit through to on-production) in the Life Cycle of aWell. BRC's existing business processes (with some optimization), were employed. BRC already had a solidinfrastructure of "silo" applications. Both a project team and a process owner were identified at the beginning of the implementation, these being key to the success of the project.An examination of the associated value, benefits and issues for this phase of Life Cycle Management is included as well as future expectations for the next phases. Introduction This paper is the second in a series of papers covering the spectrum of Life Cycle Management. The first paper provided an approach for the execution of a Life Cycle Management Plan. The approach was based upon a combination of Workflow, Integration and Notification (WIN). Current "best of breed" applications and business processes would be retained and the WIN approach used to "bridge the gaps" in both business processes and software, the result being proactive communication in the organization and effective management reporting to drive business decisions. This second paper is a case study with Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.(BRC). It reviews the solution being implemented around the "Commencement of Production" (from licence / permit through to on-production) in the Life Cycle of a Well. BRC's existing business processes (with some optimization), were employed. BRC already had a solid infrastructure of "silo" applications. Both a project team and a process owner were identified at the beginning of the implementation, these being key to the success of the project. An examination of the associated value, benefits and issues for this phase of Life Cycle Management is included. Business Challenges Burlington Resources Canada Ltd. ("BRC") is a division of Burlington Resources in Houston. BRC has on staff many highly skilled employees who do their jobs very effectively and efficiently. The Company is organized according to functional departments, such as Geology, Land, Drilling, etc. Each of these departments performs their duties very well. However, the maturing of the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin and the focus on costs and productivity have introduced newchallenges. High volume expectations, maintaining competitive advantage, and targeted drilling programs in excess of 800 wells per year lead BRC to realize their well life cycle data and processes needed to be managed more efficiently. One of the key areas of improvement surrounded the decision making and communication of well tie-in decisions and ultimately bringing wells on production.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.243 · 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