MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2184438684

Characterization of the Horn River Basin Thermogenic Shale Gas Play in Northeastern BC

2009· article· en· W2184438684 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bill Beaudoin, J. S. Shaw

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyDevonianOil shaleOrdovicianStructural basinNatural gasGeochemistryPaleontology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The laterally equivalent shales of the Evie, Klua, Otter Park Member and Muskwa are collectively known as the Horn River Group (HRG). The Middle Devonian HRG consists of Givetian-Frasnian basinal shales stratigraphically equivalent to the reefal carbonates of the Elk Point and Beaverhill Lake groups. These shales form a 200m thick package of over-pressured, organic-rich, siliceous shales found at favorable depths between 2,400-2,700m. The HRG is deemed to be a prime shale gas reservoir based on the comprehensive data. Areal extent of the play is vast. The Horn River Basin covers an area of approximately 1.28 million hectares (3.2 million acres) within the Fort Nelson/Northern Plains region. Total gas-in-place estimates range to as high as 500 trillion cubic feet. Devon Canada has acquired over 234 sections in the play fairway and has drilled 4 vertical and 6 horizontal wells to date with encouraging results. Proposed development plans consist of an initial central project, which will be replicated throughout Devon’s land holdings in the basin. With the acquisition of Mitchell Energy in 2002, Devon Energy has been actively developing the huge Barnett Shale natural gas field using innovative technologies, including being the first to use horizontal wells to improve rate and recovery. As of 2008, Devon has drilled over 3,000 wells, of which over 1,000 wells are multi-frac horizontal wells increasing Devon’s Barnett Shale production to more than 1 bcfe/d. Devon accounts for nearly a quarter of the field's overall daily production of more than 4 bcfe of natural gas equivalent. Applying knowledge from the Barnett Shale experience, advanced multi-disciplinary evaluation techniques have been used to evaluate emerging shale gas plays since the conventional techniques are not adequate for these very tight shales. These techniques include specialized petrographic, petrophysical, geochemical, geomechanical and geophysical analyses, which allow better characterization of these complex and heterogeneous shales. Integration of these datasets is essential in mitigating structural and mineralogical heterogeneity which can influence drilling and completion efficiencies.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis→French-language works237,207→