MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281477920 · doi:10.2118/171620-pa

Wettability of the Montney Tight Gas Formation

2015· article· en· W2281477920 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaEncana (Canada)University of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrophysicsImbibitionWettingTight gasPetroleum engineeringTight oilContact angleCapillary pressureGeologyFormation evaluationAdsorptionChemical engineeringPorous mediumOil shalePorosityGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceHydraulic fracturingComposite materialChemistryOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The abundant hydrocarbon resources in low-permeability formations are now technically accessible because of advances in the drilling and completion of multilateral/multifractured horizontal wells. However, measurement and modeling of petrophysical properties, required for reserves estimation and reservoir-engineering calculations, are the remaining challenges for the development of tight formations. In particular, characterizing wettability (wetting affinity) of tight rocks is challenging because of their complex pore structure, which can be either in hydrophobic organic materials or in hydrophilic inorganic materials. We conduct comparative and systematic imbibition experiments on 10 twin core plugs from the Montney tight gas formation, which is an enormous tight gas fairway in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin. Both contact-angle and imbibition data indicate that the formation has a stronger affinity to oil than to water. However, the ratio between oil and water uptake of these samples is usually higher than what capillary-driven imbibition models predict. This discrepancy can be explained by the strong adsorption of oil on the surface of a well-connected organic-pore network that is partly composed of degraded bitumen. We also define a wettability index on the basis of the equilibrium oil and water uptake of the twin samples. Oil-wettability index is positively correlated with total organic carbon and clay content of the rocks, which generally increase from the upper Montney to the lower Montney.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.217 · 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