MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119037023 · doi:10.1306/05220605164

Structurally controlled hydrothermal dolomite reservoir facies: An overview

2006· article· en· W2119037023 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

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyDolomiteFaciesGeochemistryHydrothermal circulationPetrologyMining engineeringPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Structurally controlled hydrothermal dolomite (HTD) reservoir facies and associated productive leached limestones are major hydrocarbon producers in North America and are receiving increased exploration attention globally. They include multiple trends in the Ordovician (locally, Silurian and Devonian) of the Michigan, Appalachian, and other basins of eastern Canada and the United States, and in the Devonian and Mississippian of the Western Canada sedimentary basin. They also occur in Jurassic hosts along rifted Atlantic margins, in the Jurassic–Cretaceous of the Arabian Gulf region and elsewhere. Hydrothermal dolomitization is defined as dolomitization occurring under burial conditions, commonly at shallow depths, by fluids (typically very saline) with temperature and pressure (T and P) higher than the ambient T and P of the host formation. The latter commonly is limestone. Proof of a hydrothermal origin for HTD reservoir facies requires integration of burial-thermal history plots, fluid-inclusion temperature data, and constraints on timing of emplacement. Hydrothermal dolomite reservoir facies are part of a spectrum of hydrothermal mineral deposits that include sedimentary-exhalative lead-zinc ore bodies and HTD-hosted Mississippi Valley–type sulfide deposits. All three hydrothermal deposits show a strong structural control by extensional and/or strike-slip (wrench) faults, with fluid flow typically focused at transtensional and dilational structural sites and in the hanging wall. Transtensional sags above negative flower structures on wrench faults are favored drilling sites for HTD reservoir facies. Saddle dolomite in both replacive and void-filling modes is characteristic of HTD facies. For many reservoirs, matrix-replacive dolomite and saddle dolomite appear to have formed near-contemporaneously and from the same fluid and temperature conditions. The original host facies exerts a major influence on the lateral extent of dolomitization, resultant textures, pore type, and pore volume. Breccias, zebra fabrics, shear microfractures, and other rock characteristics record short-term shear stress and pore-fluid-pressure transients, particularly proximal to active faults. High-temperature hydrothermal pulses may alter kerogen in host limestones, a process designated “forced maturation.” Basement highs, underlying sandstone (and/or carbonate?) aquifers (probably overpressured), and overlying and internal shale seals and aquitards also may constrain or influence HTD emplacement. Although many questions and uncertainties remain, particularly in terms of Mg and brine source and mass balance, recognition and active exploration of the HTD play continues to expand. Increasing use of three-dimensional seismic imagery and seismic anomaly mapping, combined with horizontal drilling oblique to linear trends defined by structural sags, helps to reduce risk.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0210.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.213 · 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