MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113042702 · doi:10.5539/esr.v2n2p223

The Use of Seismic Attributes to Enhance Structural Interpretation of Z-Field, Onshore Niger Delta

2013· article· en· W2113042702 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueEarth Science Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyNiger deltaFault (geology)PetrophysicsClosure (psychology)SeismologyGrowth faultDeltaBearing (navigation)Field (mathematics)PetrologyGeotechnical engineeringCartographyEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An integrated approach to the study of the structural patterns and seismic attributes was carried out on the Z-field using a 3D seismic data covering approximately 56 Km2 of western belt of the Niger Delta, checkshot data for well to seismic tie and log information for six wells from the field. This study aimed at investigating the available prospects, the responses of the basic seismic attributes to structural and stratigraphic elements within the study area. In all, six hydrocarbon bearing levels were delineated from well logs and correlated across the field. These horizons were analysed and petrophysical parameters estimated. An integration of well and seismic data was done by applying a time-depth relationship to identify where the hydrocarbon bearing sands from well posts on the seismic lines. These studies revealed two major regional growth faults (F1 and F5) dipping in the NE-SW directions and crestal faults (F4) dipping in the northern direction. The north dipping crestal fault F4 is responsible for holding the hydrocarbon in the proven closure A. The northernmost regional growth fault F1 is responsible for trapping the hydrocarbon in the prospect closure B in the north eastern part of the field. The closure C prospect is a four way dip closure to the spill point but becomes fault assisted on regional growth faults F1 and F5 at deeper levels. The trapping mechanism identified from our interpretation indicates that the field is characterized mostly by fault assisted closures and a few four way closures. The fault zones are identified by distinct displacement of walls and amplitude distortions towards the fault zones identified on the seismic sections and the extracted amplitude maps. At the south-western part of the field, using only seismic Stratigraphic approach, a part of fault F5 was too subtle to be identified, and this may lead to missing out on the potentials of the identified closure C prospect. Thus, where conventional seismic interpretation has failed, seismic attribute analysis complements.

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)0.001
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 score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.295 · 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