Mathematical Model for Steamflooding Naturally Fractured Carbonate Reservoirs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a three-dimensional mathematical model for steamflooding in heavy oil saturated naturally fractured carbonate reservoirs where the governing equations are written for the matrix and fracture media, separately. Uncertainties associated with the shape factor for the communication between the matrix and fracture was eliminated through setting a continuity boundary condition at the interface. Using this boundary condition, the solution method employed differs from the most of the modeling simulations reported in the literature. The Newton–Raphson approach was also used for solving mass and energy balance equations. The recovery factor and cumulative steam to oil ratio were obtained as a function of steam injection rate, temperature, and also characteristics of the fractured media such as matrix size and permeability. The numerical solution clearly shows that fractures play an important role in improving the conduction of heat into the matrix part. It is also concluded that the matrix size and total permeability are the most important parameters affecting the dependent variables involved in steamflooding in this type of reservoir. The results obtained from the mathematical modeling were compared with the real data, exhibiting a reasonable agreement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".