Pore Morphometrics and Thermal Evolution of Organic-Matter Microporosity, Colorado Group, Western Canada Sedimentary Basin*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The physics of flow in conventional oil and gas reservoirs is reasonably well understood, however, the nature of flow in carbonaceous mudstone reservoirs is unclear due to highly heterogeneous micropore structure. A quantitative model relating micropore morphometrics and matrix permeability, as yet undeveloped, is required to infer the contribution of microporosity to economic flow rates. Carbonaceous mudstones of the Upper Cretaceous Colorado Group of the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (WCSB) span a wide spectrum of thermal maturity levels. This affords an opportunity to combine regional scale of investigation with quantitative micropore morphometrics of related carbonaceous mudstones with variable burial and thermal histories. The first phase of this effort requires cataloguing of dominant modes of intrinsic microporosity (Schieber, 2010) and relating these to process dynamics in the depositional and burial domains. Phyllosilicate framework (PF) and organic matter (OM) pores are the dominant microporosity modes observed in the correlative equivalents of the Second White Specks, Belle Fourche and Fish Scales Formations of the lower Colorado Group in a gamut of samples spanning the foredeep, forebulge and backbulge segments of the WCSB foreland basin. The PF fabric suggests advective transport of mud floccules or fecal pellets as a dominant mechanism for formation of intrinsic PF microporosity. Abundant OM microporosity development in thermally immature organic matter may be indicative of non-catagenic pathways to porosity development and preservation in carbonaceous mudstones.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".