MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Downhole Fluid Analysis and Asphaltene Science for Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation

2014· review· en· W2105129564 on OpenAlexaff
Oliver C. Mullins, Andrew E. Pomerantz, Julian Y. Zuo, Chengli Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSchlumberger (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphaltenePetroleumPetroleum engineeringPetroleum reservoirReservoir modelingReservoir simulationCrude oilGeologyChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Petroleum reservoirs are enshrouded in mysteries associated with all manner of geologic and fluid complexities that Mother Nature can inspire. Efficient exploitation of petroleum reservoirs mandates elucidation of these complexities; downhole fluid analysis (DFA) has proven to be indispensable for understanding both fluids and reservoir architecture. Crude oil consists of dissolved gases, liquids, and dissolved solids, known as the asphaltenes. These different fluid components exhibit fluid gradients vertically and laterally, which are best revealed by DFA, with its excellent precision and accuracy. Compositional gradient analysis falls within the purview of thermodynamics. Gas-liquid equilibria can be treated with a cubic equation of state (EoS), such as the Peng-Robinson EoS, a modified van der Waals EoS. In contrast, the first EoS for asphaltene gradients, the Flory-Huggins-Zuo (FHZ) EoS, was developed only recently. The resolution of the asphaltene molecular and nanocolloidal species in crude oil, which is codified in the Yen-Mullins model of asphaltenes, enabled the development of this EoS. The combination of DFA characterization of gradients of reservoir crude oil with the cubic EoS and FHZ EoS analyses brings into view wide-ranging reservoir concerns, such as reservoir connectivity, fault-block migration, heavy oil gradients, tar mat formation, huge disequilibrium fluid gradients, and even stochastic variations of reservoir fluids. New petroleum science and DFA technology are helping to offset the increasing costs and technical difficulties of exploiting ever-more-remote petroleum reservoirs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular EngineeringSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207