SCA2003-03: CARBONATE ROCK WETTABILITY INTERPRETED FROM CAPILLARY PRESSURE AND IMBIBITION RESISTIVITY INDEX ANALYSES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The wettability of rock samples from 5 carbonate reservoirs in Western Canada varies from weakly water wet to mixed wet to mildly oil wet. Wettability was determined by USBM and Amott analyses on 17 aged rock samples. Evidence supporting these interpretations was provided in one case by a contact angle measurement of the live oil, and in other instances by relations between un-restored primary drainage and restored secondary drainage capillary pressure curves. Imbibition resistivity index (IRI) measurements were performed on 9 aged sister-plug samples to determine a restored Archie saturation exponent “n”. The saturation exponent measured at the onset of the IRI test provides the most reliable “n” value as it is determined on a restored sample prior to any hysteresis that occurs during increasing Sw. Values for the restored “n” vary from 1.2 to 3.1. Although the imbibition RI tests provide a reliable measure of the saturation exponent, this number cannot be used alone as a valid indicator of wettability. Wettability and pore geometry principally control the shape of the RI profile during imbibition. Comparisons of imbibition RI profiles and water relative permeability curves were made between an oil wet and water wet reservoir with similar pore geometry. The water wet samples generally exhibit suppressed electrical and hydraulic behaviour during imbibition consistent with a more water wet pore system. In contrast, the oil wet samples exhibit an instantaneous flow of water and electric current with increasing Sw that is consistent with a more oil wet pore system. The wettability interpretations and saturation exponent measurements made for these 5 carbonate reservoirs were used to refine expectations of reservoir performance and enhance petrophysical interpretations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".