MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166025375 · doi:10.1306/07220909031

Comparison of deterministic with stochastic fracture models in water-flooding numerical simulations

2009· article· en· W2166025375 on OpenAlexaff
Mandefro Belayneh, Stephan K. Matthäi, Martin J. Blunt, S. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsGeologyFlooding (psychology)Water floodingFracture (geology)Geotechnical engineeringPetroleum engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Determination of multiphase flow properties considering the variation of fracture patterns (i.e., number of fracture sets, their orientation, length distribution, spacing, and in-situ aperture) remains a key challenge in reservoirs. In reservoir engineering, one way is by studying outcrop analogs with comparable petrophysical properties and a similar geological history, and incorporating these data into model building, discretization, and numerical simulation. The limitation of directly incorporating attributes measured on outcrops is that this method is error prone because of postburial processes. Mineralized fracture (vein) attributes are good candidates to use as analogs for open fractures formed under in-situ conditions, to establish the relationship between fracture length and aperture and help to reveal the conditions at the time of their formation, and to quantify fracture-induced porosity in rock masses. Vein attributes determined from scan lines and window samples were combined to condition the stochastic generation of fractures using the discrete fracture network code FracMan. Comparison of water breakthrough time and oil saturation at breakthrough was then determined by applying a constant pressure gradient for each realization to simulate water-flooding numerical simulation using the combined finite element–finite volume method. The different stochastic realizations were compared with discrete fracture and matrix models, and we show how the uncertainty in these fracture attributes affects multiphase flow behavior in naturally fractured rocks. Uncertainty in quantifying these attributes has a profound impact for predicting the oil recovery and water breakthrough time based on limited information from boreholes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations60
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAPG BulletinSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207