An Assessment of the Hydrocarbon Potential of the Gombe Formation, Upper Benue Trough, Northeastern Nigeria: Organic Geochemical Point of View
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gombe Formation is a heterogeneous sequence within the Upper Benue Trough consisting principally of shales with sands, clays and intercalations of coal. It is over 600 m thick maximally in some parts of the sub-basin and has been dated Maastritchtian. Fifteen (15) core samples from 3 boreholes (BA-7, BA-16 and BA-17) dug around the Maiganga Coal Mine have been studied geochemically using the Rock-Eval 6 method with the principal aim of evaluating their potential as possible source rocks for petroleum. The results of the Rock-Eval analysis for analyzed core samples from these boreholes within Gombe Formation shows that the samples in boreholes BA-7 and BA-16 contain Type II kerogen while those from borehole BA-17 contain Type III kerogen, and that the samples from boreholes BA-7 and BA-16 have very good generative potential while those from borehole BA-17 have good to very good potential. This study also reveals that the analyzed samples especially those from boreholes BA-7 and BA-16 may constitute good source rocks if the burial depth is sufficient. The Rock-Eval Tmax data available for thermal maturity assessment of the samples suggest that the analyzed samples from the three boreholes are thermally immature. This assessment is consistent with the immaturity status of their coeval Formations (Pindiga and Gongila Formations) in other part of the Benue Trough, suggesting that these contemporaneous Formations may be related in depth and/or have experienced similar geothermal gradient. It is therefore recommended that the thermal maturity of the analyzed samples from the three boreholes be re-evaluated by other thermal maturity indices such as vitrinite reflectance measurement and biomarker evaluation in order to further authenticate the maturity status of the Formation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".