MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2224993797 · doi:10.1139/cjes-2015-0076

Secondary migration of hydrocarbons in the Zhujiang Formation in the Huixi half-graben, Pearl River Mouth Basin, South China Sea

2016· article· en· W2224993797 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Junwen Peng, Xiongqi Pang, Shuang Xiao, Huijie Peng, Qianwen Li, Shuang Song, Luya Wu, Di Chen, Tao Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science and Technology Major ProjectChina National Offshore Oil CorporationUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsGeologyGrabenSource rockStructural basinGeochemistryPermeability (electromagnetism)GeomorphologyRiver mouthPetrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The process and mechanisms of secondary hydrocarbon migration in the Huixi half-graben, Pearl River Mouth Basin, were investigated on the basis of geological analysis of the strata and study of the porosity and permeability of the reservoir rocks, fluid potential, oil properties, and geochemistry of oil–source correlation. The results suggest that the hydrocarbons of the Zhujiang Formation in the Huixi half-graben were derived from source rocks of the Eocene Wenchang Formation and the Eocene–Oligocene Enping Formation in the Huizhou Sag. The hydrocarbons migrated laterally from northeast to southwest. The sandstone in the upper member of the Zhujiang Formation exhibited superior physical properties (porosity and permeability) and connectivity than the lower member. Thin sandstone beds with good physical properties and stable distribution in the upper member of the Zhujiang Formation were the main carrier beds for lateral hydrocarbon migration.

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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207