MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112621917 · doi:10.1080/10916466.2010.512893

An Efficient and Robust Saturation Pressure Calculation Algorithm for Petroleum Reservoir Fluids Using a Neural Network

2012· article· en· W2112621917 on OpenAlex
Mojtaba Seifi, Jalal Abedi

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePetroleum Science and Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkApproximation errorSaturation (graph theory)ComputationBubble pointCorrelation coefficientAlgorithmApplied mathematicsComputer scienceWork (physics)MathematicsBubblePetroleum engineeringGeologyStatisticsThermodynamicsPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Saturation pressure is one of the key parameters in hydrocarbon reservoir engineering computations that can be obtained by either empirical correlations or equations of state. In the latter case, one of the greatest challenges in calculation is the selection of a good initial value to start the iteration. In this work, a feed-forward multilayer neural network model is introduced to predict a good initial value for bubble-point pressure calculation applying iterative methods. The model was developed by using 411 published data samples from fields in the Middle East. This model provides a prediction of the bubble point with a relative average error of 0.532%, an absolute average error of 3.273%, a standard deviation of 3.417%, and a correlation coefficient of 0.999989, which implies great accuracy.

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)0.001
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 score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.258 · 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