MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Downward hydrocarbon migration predicted from numerical modeling of fluid overpressure in the Paleozoic Anticosti Basin, eastern Canada

2010· article· en· W2130893527 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Guoxiang Chi, Denis Lavoie, R. Bertrand, M.-K. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueGeofluids · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueGeological Survey of CanadaUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaShell Canada
KeywordsOverpressureGeologyOrdovicianPaleozoicStructural basinSource rockBasin modellingDolomitizationBuoyancyPetrologyGeochemistryGeomorphologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Anticosti Basin is a large Paleozoic basin in eastern Canada where potential source and reservoir rocks have been identified but no economic hydrocarbon reservoirs have been found. Potential source rocks of the Upper Ordovician Macasty Formation overlie carbonates of the Middle Ordovician Mingan Formation, which are underlain by dolostones of the Lower Ordovician Romaine Formation. These carbonates have been subjected to dissolution and dolomitization and are potential hydrocarbon reservoirs. Numerical simulations of fluid‐overpressure development related to sediment compaction and hydrocarbon generation were carried out to investigate whether hydrocarbons generated in the Macasty Formation could migrate downward into the underlying Mingan and Romaine formations. The modeling results indicate that, in the central part of the basin, maximum fluid overpressures developed above the Macasty Formation due to rapid sedimentation. This overpressured core dissipated gradually with time, but the overpressure pattern (i.e. maximum overpressure above source rock) was maintained during the generation of oil and gas. The downward impelling force associated with fluid‐overpressure gradients in the central part of the basin was stronger than the buoyancy force for oil, whereas the buoyancy force for gas and for oil generated in the later stage of the basin is stronger than the overpressure‐related force. Based on these results, it is proposed that oil generated from the Macasty Formation in the central part of the basin first moved downward into the Mingan and Romaine formations, and then migrated laterally up‐dip toward the basin margin, whereas gas throughout the basin and oil generated in the northern part of the basin generally moved upward. Consequently, gas reservoirs are predicted to occur in the upper part of the basin, whereas oil reservoirs are more likely to be found in the strata below the source rocks. Geofluids(2010)10, 334–350

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeofluidsSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207