MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289296502 · doi:10.2118/0315-008-twa

Microfluidics and Their Macro Applications for the Oil and Gas Industry

2015· article· en· W2289296502 on OpenAlexaff
David Sinton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Way Ahead · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofluidicsRevenueScale (ratio)StandardizationPetroleum industryBusinessFossil fuelNanotechnologyIndustrial organizationEngineeringComputer scienceMaterials scienceFinanceWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Academia Pore-scale transport phenomena in reservoirs is of critical importance to the oil and gas industry, and the study of fluid transport at small scales has a long history that predates the term “microfluidics.” The term is predominantly associated with microfluidic chip-based technology that emerged in the 1990s and grew in response to health and life science applications. Oil and gas professionals are realizing the potential of this technology and tapping into various sectors. For example, OndaVia, founded in 2009, has patented microfluidics-based analysis and separation tools for applications in the chemical industry. There are exciting opportunities for industry giants not only to improve their business but also to encourage research at academic institutions. Researchers and entrepreneurs can collaborate in order to make microfluidics applications more accessible and soon become the go-to solutions to inform operations and perform fluid analysis. There are also tremendous opportunities through startup companies and technology acquisitions to provide faster and better fluid property measurements as well as screening and assessment of reservoir processes at the pore scale. The biggest challenges here are investment capital and standardization, both of which need to be addressed with more awareness among the industry pioneers. Microfluidics for oil and gas startups can grow in response to revenue and may be acquired by an established service company to reach global markets. The central advantages that motivated the microfluidic approach in life sciences were rapid analysis; low reagent volumes; low cost; excellent control of conditions, particularly on the scale of biological cells; and opportunities for separations and multiplexing. Several of these advantages can translate directly to oil and gas applications, both above and below ground, as highlighted in Fig. 1. In addition, suitably fabricated glass and silicon microfluidic chips can readily accommodate reservoir pressures. For instance, in contrast to conventional large pressure/volume/temperature cells, high pressures are easily handled with microfluidics owing to the very small volumes (and small areas) involved. The challenge is leveraging our unique microfluidic tools to maximize the contribution to the energy sector. We need to find challenges that are both important and uniquely well-suited to a microfluidic approach. Outlined below are two such approaches: microfluidics for oil and gas fluid analysis, and microfluidics/micromodels to understand pore-scale processes in reservoirs.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Way AheadSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207