MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133188578 · doi:10.1306/10270606060

Thermal maturity of the Barnett Shale determined from well-log analysis

2007· article· en· W2133188578 on OpenAlexaff
Hank Zhao, Natalie B. Givens, Brad Curtis

Bibliographic record

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyOil shaleMaturity (psychological)GeochemistryMineralogyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Intensive development with large-scale fracturing treatments has made the Barnett Shale play (Newark East field) in the Fort Worth Basin the largest shale-gas field in the world. The Mississippian Barnett Shale is an organic-rich, self-sourced reservoir rock. Thermal maturity, thickness, and total organic carbon are the most important geological factors for commercial gas production from this shale formation. The log-derived thermal-maturity index (MI) has been developed in an effort to better understand and predict hydrocarbon phases across the basin. Maturity index was calculated using three types of open-hole logs: neutron porosity, deep resistivity, and density porosity (or bulk density). The derivation of MI is based on the hypotheses that shale gas is generated and stored locally without apparent migration from outside sources, and that the water saturation and the density of generated hydrocarbons decrease with an increase in thermal maturity. Maturity index correlates well with initial gas:oil ratios (GOR) from well production data. Based on this correlation, an empirical relationship has been demonstrated for the Fort Worth Basin. This method is useful in understanding the thermal-maturity levels of Barnett Shale source rock in the gas-generation window. Mapping MI, GOR, and gas heating value from hundreds of wells identifies the various maturity stages and areas of Barnett Shale that generate oil, condensate, wet gas, or dry gas in the Fort Worth Basin.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations113
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAPG BulletinSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207