MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2334793820

Time-lapse seismic and AVO modelling, White Rose Field, Newfoundland

2001· article· en· W2334793820 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ying Zou, L. R. Bentley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRose (mathematics)GeologySaturation (graph theory)Oil fieldFossil fuelPetroleum engineeringResidualSeismologyChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have applied FluidSeis, well logs and AVO modelling to investigate the change in seismic response due to fluid substitution in the White Rose Field. The White Rose Field has a gas cap, an oil leg and a water drive. Three scenarios are presented. A water drive has water replacing the oil in the oil leg up to residual oil saturation. A gas drive has gas replacing the oil in the oil leg up to residual oil saturation. A final scenario has gas invading the upper half of the oil leg and water invading the lower half of the oil leg. Using PVT data and inferred post-production saturation, new sonic logs and density logs are generated. Synthetic seismic and AVO models are compared before and after production. Reflection coefficients at the gas-oil contact (GOC) and the oil-water contact (OWC) change in magnitude approximately 15%. The synthetics indicate that P-P and PS AVO responses can be used to observe the changes in fluid distributions. The change in density due to fluid substitution appears to be the major factor in changing the seismic response. This study indicates that the White Rose Field is a good candidate for timelapse seismic monitoring of fluid movements.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques→French-language works237,207→