MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293128822 · doi:10.1111/jpg.12626

CONTROLS ON RESERVOIR DIAGENESIS IN THE LOWER GORU SANDSTONE FORMATION, LOWER INDUS BASIN, PAKISTAN

2015· article· en· W2293128822 on OpenAlex
M. O. A. Baig, Nicholas B. Harris, Hassaan Ahmed

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Geology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsGeologyAuthigenicDiagenesisChloriteFeldsparGeochemistryPermeability (electromagnetism)QuartzCalcitePetroleum reservoirClastic rockClay mineralsPorosityGeomorphologyStructural basinMineralogyPetrologyPaleontologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sandstones in the Lower Cretaceous Lower Goru Formation in the Lower Indus Basin, Pakistan, are important reservoir rocks for oil, gas and gas‐condensates. For this study, nine metres of core from depths of more than 3400m from well X‐1 in the north‐central part of the basin were analysed for major variations in porosity and permeability in two Lower Goru sandstone units referred to as the Basal and Massive Sands. The Lower Goru Basal Sand was deposited in lower shoreface to inner shelf settings at the well location, while the Massive Sand was deposited in a middle to lower shoreface setting. In both units, intervals with moderate to good (> 15%) porosities alternate with intervals with very low porosity (<5%), and similar variations in core permeability were observed. In this paper, the reasons for this reservoir quality variation at well X‐1 are investigated. Specifically, the study addresses the influence of different clay types on reservoir porosity and permeability within the Lower Goru sands and the distribution and impact of hard cements such as calcite and quartz. A range of petrographical data is integrated including thin sections, whole rock and clay XRD results and SEM images, which together provide some insights into the causes of reservoir quality variation and into the paragenetic relationships between the authigenic minerals. Chlorite grain coats are present in the higher‐porosity sandstones and are interpreted to have inhibited the formation of quartz overgrowths. Dissolution of feldspar and volcanic rock fragments in both the Basal and Massive Sands has contributed to an increase in overall porosity at well X‐1. Relatively low porosity intervals in the Massive Sand are associated with the absence of chlorite grain coats and the presence of abundant quartz overgrowths. By contrast, low porosity intervals in the Basal Sand have undergone early poikilotopic calcite cementation. The formation of authigenic illite resulted in a significant decrease in permeability in both the Basal and Massive Sands. Chlorite and kaolinite also reduced the permeability. The chlorite originated mainly from the dissolution of volcanic rock fragments or from precursor depositional berthierine clay. The transformation of K‐feldspar to illite is suggested to be the main reaction responsible for the formation of both authigenic illite and quartz overgrowths in the two reservoir units; the observed pressure solution will also have contributed to development of quartz overgrowths.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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