MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2181370673

Frequency-dependent Streaming Potential of Reservoir Rocks

2011· article· en· W2181370673 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E. Tardif, E. Walker, Paul Glover, Jean Ruel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreaming currentPermeability (electromagnetism)RADIUSPorous mediumMechanicsPorosityMaterials scienceMineralogyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OpticsChemistryPhysicsComposite materialNanotechnology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The scientific literature is almost devoid of frequency-dependent electro-kinetic measurements on geological materials. We have designed, constructed and tested an apparatus that allows the measurement of the streaming potential coupling coefficient and zeta potential of unconsolidated reservoir materials. The apparatus uses an electro-magnetic drive and operates in the range 1 Hz to 1 kHz. The sample diameter is 25.4 mm and samples can be up to 150 mm long. We have made streaming potential coupling coefficient measurements on samples of Ottawa sand as a function of frequency. The results have been analyzed using critically and variably damped second order vibrational mechanics models as well as the theoretical models of Packard (1953) for capillary tubes and Pride (1994) for porous media. Such modelling allows a transition frequency to be calculated, which can in turn be used to calculate the pore radius of the samples. The permeability of the samples can then be obtained using the work of Walker and Glover (2010). In all cases the transition frequencies were in good agreement with those expected from independent measurements of effective pore radius that were derived from laser diffraction and MICP measurements. This indicates that the transition frequency measurements can be used to calculate the effective pore radius of the reservoir material. Fluid permeability predicted from the transition frequency were also in good agreement with those measured on the sand samples.

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 score0.002
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.228
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 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207