MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139406724 · doi:10.1111/gfl.12147

Klinkenberg gas slippage measurements as a means for shale pore structure characterization

2015· article· en· W2139406724 on OpenAlexafffund
Eric Aiden Letham, R.M. Bustin

Bibliographic record

VenueGeofluids · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSlippageTortuosityPermeability (electromagnetism)GeologyPorosityOil shaleAnisotropyPore water pressureMineralogyMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialChemistryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Established techniques that have been successfully used to characterize pore systems in conventional reservoir rocks lack the resolution and scalability required to adequately characterize the nano‐ to micrometer scale pore systems found in shale and cannot be applied on stressed samples. We have therefore investigated the utility ofKlinkenberg gas slippage measurements for shale pore structure characterization. In contrast to other approaches, slippage measurements characterize the effective porosity of core samples and can be applied at stress conditions experienced in the reservoir during production. Slippage measurements on horizontally and vertically oriented samples from theEagleFordShaleFormation,Texas,USA, at a range of stress states revealed two orders of magnitude in slippage variation over five orders of magnitude permeability range. Slippage measurements are negatively correlated with permeability and follow similar trends to those found in other studies on higher permeability rocks. The samples had varying degrees of slippage anisotropy, which allowed interpretation of the relative contribution of tortuosity and pore size to permeability anisotropy. Slippage and therefore average effective pore size was found to vary up to one order of magnitude at a given permeability, warranting investigation of the significance this might have on flow properties and ultimately hydrocarbon production from shale.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations100
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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