MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2278342073 · doi:10.1016/s1876-3804(16)30010-6

Well pattern design and optimal deployment for coalbed methane development

2016· article· en· W2278342073 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePetroleum Exploration and Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCoal Properties and Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlgoma University
KeywordsCoalbed methaneRhombusGeologyPermeability (electromagnetism)Stage (stratigraphy)Petroleum engineeringDrillingLithologyCoalCoal miningMining engineeringPetrologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the coalbed methane development of III block in the eastern edge of the Ordos Basin, the well pattern was optimized and dynamically adjusted, according to a system engineering including three stages: well pattern pre-development design stage, well site optimization stage and dynamic tracking stage. The geological basis for well deployment of coalbed methane was proposed and the parameters of well pattern design were optimized during the well pattern pre-development design stage. The geological conditions have been explored from several aspects which include coal bed structure, buried depth, coal seam thickness, roof and floor lithology, gas content, permeability and hydrological condition. The favorable production well pattern was the rhombus pattern. The cluster well was chosen as the main well type and then horizontal well. For the local anisotropy coal seam, rhombus long diagonal was in the direction of face cleats and short diagonal was in the direction of butt cleats. The well spacing was 300−350 m in high permeability zones and 350−400 m in low permeability zones. It is necessary to consider those factors, such as surface, subsurface and drilling conditions, to optimize the well locations during the well site optimization stage and to follow the basic requirements of “surface following subsurface, engineering following geology”. After having observed the well interference and interlayer interference phenomenon during the dynamic tracking stage, twenty-four production wells have been relocated and the producing layers for thirty-six production wells have been changed. Then the well pattern design was more reasonable in this block. It is confirmed that the posterior well pattern design and development mode are more reasonable after the optimal deployment in the III block during this five years.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.180 · 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