MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2269218356

Abstract: Understanding the origin of deformed Albert Formation sandstone reservoirs: An analogue study with the northeastern Uinta Basin, Utah

2008· article· en· W2269218356 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicola Harcourt, David Keighley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreen River FormationSiltstoneGeologyOutcropOil shaleStratigraphic unitPaleontologyStructural basinGeochemistryFacies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Albert Formation (Horton Group, Mississippian) of the Moncton Basin in New Brunswick is currently divided into three lithostratigraphic units, two of which are the Frederick Brook Member and interfingering – overlying Hiram Brook Member. These units are interpreted to represent a complex interbedding of lacustrine shale (Frederick Brook Member) with deltaic and lacustrine shoreline sandbodies (Hiram Brook Member). Such sandbodies, some of which are up to 30m thick, have been the successful target for oil and gas exploration in the province. However, the understanding of the original largescale geometries of these sandstone reservoir rocks remains limited. This is because the Formation has undergone extensive deformation, and its present-day surface exposure is very patchy. Therefore, analogue studies can be a potentially useful tool to improve our understanding of the reservoir. Greiner, in 1962, first noted the “remarkable resemblances” of the Albert Formation to the Eocene lacustrine formations of Colorado, Wyoming and Utah. For instance, the stratigraphic succession in northeastern Uinta Basin of Utah includes a thick, fine-grained siltstone and oil-shale interval (Green River Formation), overlain by a mixed fine-coarse grained siltstone-sandstone and locally evaporitic unit (Uinta Formation). Interpretation of basal Uinta Formation strata (potentially analogous to the basal Hiram Brook Member) and the nature of its contact with underlying shale and oil shale of the Green River Formation (Frederick Brook Member equivalent) is also complicated by deformation. The extensive and high quality outcrops in the Uinta Basin permits identification of a localized nature to the deformation at the Green River – Uinta Formation contact. At the meter scale, beds have been dewatered and folded, with large flame structures also punctuating the contact. At the decameter scale, domal and diapiric mudstone structures are common. These structures, which were originally interpreted to represent delta-front clinoforms, appear to be more indicative of flat-lying sheetflood deposits that have been subsequently dewatered and tilted after loading and diapirism, suggesting that Lake Uinta at the time of oil shale deposition subsequently experienced a major base-level fall before any of the observed coarser grained units were deposited. Such an interpretation may be applied as a working model for further investigation of the Albert Formation.

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)0.001
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 score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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