MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2294847910 · doi:10.2172/1184025

Crump Geyser Exploration and Drilling Project. High Precision Geophysics and Detailed Structural Exploration and Slim Well Drilling

2015· report· en· W2294847910 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Fairbank, N. Craig Smith

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsBC Hydro (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrillingGeologyExploration geophysicsLithologyAquiferBoreholeScientific drillingGeophysicsPetroleum engineeringSeismologyPetrologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringGroundwaterMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Crump Geyser Exploration and Drilling Project – High Precision Geophysics and Detailed Structural Exploration and Slim Well Drilling ran from January 29, 2010 to September 30, 2013. During Phase 1 of the project, collection of all geophysical surveys was completed as outlined in the Statement of Project Objectives. In addition, a 5000-foot full sized exploration well was drilled by Ormat, and preexisting drilling data was discovered for multiple temperature gradient wells within the project area. Three dimensional modeling and interpretation of results from the geophysical surveys and drilling data gave confidence to move to the project into Phase 2 drilling. Geological and geophysical survey interpretations combined with existing downhole temperature data provided an ideal target for the first slim-hole drilled as the first task in Phase 2. Slim-hole 35-34 was drilled in September 2011 and tested temperature, lithology, and permeability along the primary range-bounding fault zone near its intersection with buried northwest-trending faults that have been identified using geophysical methods. Following analysis of the results of the first slim-hole 35-34, the second slim hole was not drilled and subsequent project tasks, including flowing differential self-potential (FDSP) surveys that were designed to detail the affect of production and injection on water flow in the shallow aquifer, were not completed. NGP sold the Crump project to Ormat in August 2014, afterwards, there was insufficient time and interest from Ormat available to complete the project objectives. NGP was unable to continue managing the award for a project they did not own due to liability issues and Novation of the award was not a viable option due to federal award timelines. NGP submitted a request to mutually terminate the award on February 18, 2015. The results of all of the technical surveys and drilling are included in this report. Fault interpretations from surface geology, aeromag, seismic, and gravity data sets are in good agreement, illustrating two or more major range-bounding faults and buried northwest trending faults. The intersections of these fault systems provide the primary targets for drilling.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.254
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDrilling and Well Engineering→French-language works237,207→