MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256583461 · doi:10.2118/154954-ms

Automatic Isotherm Derivation from Field Data for Oilfield Scale Inhibitor Squeeze Treatments

2012· article· en· W2256583461 on OpenAlexaff
Oscar Vazquez, David Corne, M. M. Jordan, Eric Mackay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsNalco (Canada)
FundersHeriot-Watt University
KeywordsScalingOil fieldScale (ratio)Petroleum engineeringField (mathematics)Test dataCore (optical fiber)Flow assuranceComputer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematicsAlgorithmMathematical optimizationChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Oilfield scale formation represents a very significant flow assurance challenge to the oil and gas industry, with increasing water production worldwide and higher oil prices. Scale Inhibitor (SI) squeeze treatment is the most widespread method to combat downhole scaling. In order to predict SI squeeze treatments accurately for further optimisation, it is necessary to simulate the SI retention in the formation, which may be described by pseudo-adsorption isotherms. While these are often derived from core flood experiments, sometimes they are not appropriate for modelling well treatments because the core tests on which they are based cannot fully represent field scale processes. In practice, the parameters of an analytic form of the isotherm equation are modified by trial and error by an experienced practitioner until a match is obtained between the prediction and the return profile of the first treatment in the field. The main purpose of this paper is to present a Stochastic Hill Climbing Algorithm for automatic isotherm derivation. The performance of the algorithm was evaluated using data from three field cases. Two success criteria were defined: firstly, ability to match a single historical treatment and secondly, ability to predict subsequent successive treatments. To test for the second criterion, a candidate isotherm was derived from the first treatment in a well that was treated with the same chemical package on consecutive occasions, and then the predictions using the suggested solution were compared with the observed scale inhibitor concentration return profiles from the subsequent treatments. In all the calculations, performance of the isotherms suggested by the Hill Climbing algorithm and isotherms derived by trial and error were compared. The results demonstrate that the Hill Climber Algorithm is a very effective technique for deriving an isotherm to enable accurate modelling of scale inhibitor squeeze treatments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207