MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516431504 · doi:10.1190/segam2016-13965568.1

Modeling electromagnetic fields in the presence of casing

2016· article· en· W2516431504 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasingGeologyElectromagnetic fieldPetroleum engineeringAcousticsComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PreviousNext No AccessSEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2016Modeling electromagnetic fields in the presence of casingAuthors: Eldad HaberChristoph SchwarzbachRoman ShekhtmanEldad HaberUBC, Christoph SchwarzbachUBC, and Roman ShekhtmanUBChttps://doi.org/10.1190/segam2016-13965568.1 SectionsSupplemental MaterialAboutPDF/ePub ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail Abstract Electromagnetic (EM) methods in geophysics have wide usability. From mineral and oil exploration Ward and Hohmann (1988); Constable and Cox (1996); Mukherjee and Everett (2011) to deep earth studies Mackie et al. (1993). As a result, large effort has been given to the modeling of electromagnetic phenomena for realistic earth scenarios with the emergence of either staggered grid finite difference techniques Haber et al. (2000); Newman and Commer (2005); Weiss and Newman (2003); Haber and Ascher (2001); Haber (2014) or edge based finite element methods Schwarzbach and Haber (2011); Jin (1993); Key and Ovall (2011) as preferable methods for simulation. Further advances use adaptive mesh Haber and Heldmann (2007); Key and Ovall (2011) in order to obtain better accuracy with fewer cells in the discretization. Presentation Date: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 Start Time: 3:35:00 PM Location: 174 Presentation Type: ORAL Keywords: electromagnetic, modeling, 3D, borehole geophysicsPermalink: https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2016-13965568.1FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byElectrical and electromagnetic responses over steel-cased wellsLindsey J. Heagy and Douglas W. Oldenburg1 February 2022 | The Leading Edge, Vol. 41, No. 2Insights on electromagnetic scattering by steel casings in surface-to-borehole and borehole-to-surface methodsNestor H. Cuevas1 February 2022 | The Leading Edge, Vol. 41, No. 2Observing and modeling the effects of production infrastructure in electromagnetic surveysChester J. Weiss, G. Didem Beskardes, Kris MacLennan, Michael J. Wilt, Evan Schankee Um, and Don C. Lawton1 February 2022 | The Leading Edge, Vol. 41, No. 2VTI, HTI, TTI and combination of symmetries: Electrical anisotropy and its impact in unconventional reservoirsAna Curcio1 September 20213D finite volume modeling of steel casings in controlled source electromagnetic surveys using the concept of edge conductivityYing Hu and Dikun Yang1 September 2021Electrical imaging of hydraulic fracturing fluid using steel-cased wells and a deep-learning methodYinchu Li and Dikun Yang8 July 2021 | GEOPHYSICS, Vol. 86, No. 4Symmetries and configurations of hydraulic fracturing electromagnetic monitoring: a 2D anisotropic approach7 January 2021 | Geomechanics and Geophysics for Geo-Energy and Geo-Resources, Vol. 7, No. 1Three-dimensional fracture continuum characterization aided by surface time-domain electromagnetics and hydrogeophysical joint inversion—proof-of-concept28 May 2020 | Computational Geosciences, Vol. 24, No. 5Monitoring directional fluid flow in shale gas hydraulic fracturing through electrically energized steel well casingsDikun Yang* and Yinchu Li28 September 2019Modeling electromagnetics on cylindrical meshes with applications to steel-cased wellsComputers & Geosciences, Vol. 1253D DC resistivity modeling of complex fracture networksG. Didem Beskardes and Chester J. Weiss27 August 2018Effects of completion design on electrically stimulated casing and its 3D responseChester J. Weiss, Evan Um, and Michael Wilt27 August 2018Modeling the electrical response of oil field infrastructureChester Weiss and Glenn Wilson17 August 2017Effects of steel casing in mCSEM: Analysis on the air-sea interface and a steel infrastructureSeokmin Oh, Kyubo Noh, Soon Jee Seol, and Joongmoo Byun17 August 2017EM Exploration Complete Session17 August 2017 SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2016ISSN (print):1052-3812 ISSN (online):1949-4645Copyright: 2016 Pages: 5654 publication data© 2016 Published in electronic format with permission by the Society of Exploration GeophysicistsPublisher:Society of Exploration Geophysicists HistoryPublished Online: 01 Sep 2016 CITATION INFORMATION Eldad Haber, Christoph Schwarzbach, and Roman Shekhtman, (2016), "Modeling electromagnetic fields in the presence of casing," SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts : 959-964. https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2016-13965568.1 Plain-Language Summary Keywordselectromagneticmodeling3Dborehole geophysicsPDF DownloadLoading ...

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)0.000
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 score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.248 · 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