MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142770811 · doi:10.2118/107453-ms

Using Neural Network System for Casing Collapse Occurrence and Its Depth Prediction in a Middle-Eastern Carbonate Field

2007· article· en· W2142770811 on OpenAlexaff
Saeed Salehi, G. Hareland, Masoud Ganji, Keivan Khademi Dehkordi, Mohammad Abdollahı

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasingWorkoverArtificial neural networkGeologyPetroleum engineeringOil fieldCarbonateCompletion (oil and gas wells)Geotechnical engineeringCompactionField (mathematics)Mining engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A large carbonate oil field in Iran is suffering from severe casing collapses. 48 casing collapses have been found to be reservoir compaction and poro-elastic effects and corrosion. The application of neural networks for predicting casing collapses using complex multi-dimensional field data has been undertaken. This paper shows how a neural network (ANN) system can be trained based on the parameters affecting casing collapse to estimate the potential of collapse of wells to be drilled as well as the current wells producing in the field. The potential use of this type of analysis is large in that it can be linked as a critical risking parameter in future field development analysis. Being able to quantify the potential for collapse of a well in the future can give management the foundation for a better financial decision making on what wells and where to drill them with the potential for the larger net return on the investment. The estimated collapse and corresponding depth could also benefit in the type of casing design and completion method to be selected as well as workover designs. Interpretation of the neural network results, together with engineering judgment, allowed us to conclude that using this method is technically feasible for predicting casing collapses in this field.

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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207