MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340570380 · doi:10.1144/petgeo2015-063

A workflow for vertical and horizontal near-wellbore permeability modelling in the McMurray Formation

2016· article· en· W2340570380 on OpenAlexaffabout
Olena Babak, Jonah Resnick

Bibliographic record

VenuePetroleum Geoscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsCenovus Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyWellboreEnvironmental geologyGeobiologyIgneous petrologyHydrogeologyPermeability (electromagnetism)PetrologyMetamorphic petrologyGemologyPalaeogeographyWorkflowRegional geologyEconomic geologyTelmatologyHorizontal and verticalEngineering geologyGeotechnical engineeringVolcanismPetroleum engineeringSeismologyTectonicsGeodesyDatabaseComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The McMurray Formation is the most volumetrically important source of bitumen in the Canadian oil sands. While there are many parameters that affect prediction of bitumen recovery in commercial in situ oil sand projects, absolute permeability is the most important geological parameter. In this paper, we describe a customized near-wellbore modelling workflow for the estimation of vertical and horizontal permeability in the McMurray Formation using high-resolution microresistivity images. All steps required to calculate permeability logs calibrated to core plug measurements are documented and detailed. To show a general applicability of the method, a case study of several wells from the Cenovus Energy Inc. (Cenovus) Foster Creek project is presented. The wells are specifically selected to be different in terms of facies, their characteristics and interval lengths.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePetroleum GeoscienceSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207