A Model for Real Gas Transfer in Nanopores of Shale Gas Reservoirs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The gas transport in nanopores of shale gas reservoirs is significantly different from that in conventional gas reservoirs. A model for ideal gas in nanopores is derived based on a weighted summation of slip flow and Knudsen diffusion, where ratios of intermolecular collisions and molecular and nanopores wall collisions to total collisions are the weighted factors of slip flow and Knudsen diffusion, respectively. This model is extended to the application of real gas transport in nanopores by taking into account the effects of intermolecular force and gas molecule volume on mass transport under the condition of high pressure. The model is validated by published molecular simulation data. The results show that the model is more reasonable to describe all of the gas transport mechanisms known, including continuous flow, slip flow and transition flow; the degree of real gas effects on gas transport is up to 23%, which is controlled by pressure, temperature, nanopores radius and gas type; and methane transport capacity is underestimated by 65.09% with helium and overestimated by 106.27% with nitrogen in simulation of methane transport in shale nanopores under the condition of laboratory experiments.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".