Geotechnical Characterization of Clearwater Clay Shale and Comparison of the Properties With Other Cretaceous Clay Shales in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Over the last 30 years, laboratory testing has been conducted to investigate the geotechnical properties of Clearwater clay shales from the Clearwater formation in northeast Alberta, Canada. These properties are important for characterization of the overburden zones above in-situ oil-sands mines and for assessment of caprock integrity in steam-assisted-gravity-drainage (SAGD) projects. In general, caprock-integrity assessments include caprock geological studies, in-situ stress determination, constitutive-property characterization, and numerical simulations, which allow operators to ensure that steam-injection pressure does not cause any risk to the confinement of steam chambers. The aim of this study is to identify and provide the representative parameters that can enhance understanding of the geotechnical behaviour of the Alberta Clearwater formation clay shale. Moreover, it illustrates how the results can be used to extract constitutive model parameters for modelling the behaviour of this class of material. The parameters are also used for complex reservoir-geomechanical simulation for caprock integrity. These parameters are also compared with other Cretaceous clay-shale counterparts in North America.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".