MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2186606131

A SOURCE ROCK EVALUATION USING A HIGH RESOLUTION MICROANALYSIS APPROACH OF THE DEVONIAN BIRDBEAR FORMATION IN SOUTHERN SASKATCHEWAN

2014· article· en· W2186606131 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ashlee Latimer, Stephen L. Bend

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrographyGeologySource rockDevonianMineralogyLithologyKerogenGeochemistryBoreholePaleontology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary This paper presents the results from a high resolution, integrated geochemical and petrographical analytical assessment of source rock potential of the Devonian Birdbear Formation in southern Saskatchewan. The Birdbear Formation in borehole 12-23-15-14W2 was previously identified as having source potential, although at an unspecified depth. This study uses the high resolution sampling of core to clearly define zones of high source potential and those that have none within a correlatable lithologic framework. The Birdbear Formation is highly laminated in places and particularly within zones of relative source potential. This study utilizes a form of microanalyses, i.e. sampling at the millimeter to centimeter scale to more accurately define the geochemical and petrographic characteristics of each source layer as compared to bulk (meter scale) analyses typically employed. In this way two zones have been identified as having source potential, the stratigraphically higher zone has TOC ranging from 3.63 to 16.87 wt. % and the stratigraphically lower zone has TOC ranging from 0.89 to 7.07 wt. %, characterized as Type I and Type I/II. UV/fluorescence petrographic analysis has identified the organic matter as amorphous kerogen, classified as Bituminite. The Tmax range of the analysed samples is from 408 to 439 o C with an average of 427 o C which indicates the samples are immature to marginally mature. This study shows the importance of microanalyses (millimeter to centimeter scale) in comparison to bulk (meter scale) analyses.

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 score0.275
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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