MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548394865 · doi:10.1144/petgeo2016-070

Causes and mitigation strategies of surface hydrocarbon leaks at heavy-oil fields: examples from Alberta and California

2016· article· en· W2548394865 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Richard A. Schultz

Bibliographic record

VenuePetroleum Geoscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Natural Resources LimitedUniversity of Texas at Austin
KeywordsTelmatologyEnvironmental geologyMetamorphic petrologyGeobiologyGeologyEconomic geologyIgneous petrologyRegional geologyEngineering geologyHydrocarbonHydrogeologyPalaeogeographyEarth sciencePetroleum engineeringSeismologyVolcanismGeotechnical engineeringTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identification and mitigation of leaks of subsurface fluids such as hydrocarbons at many heavy-oil fields is a first-order concern to operating companies, their regulators and the public. A variety of leaks have been documented at heavy-oil fields in Alberta (Canada) and California (USA). Although the petroleum geology and tectonic framework of fields in these areas differ significantly, production-related uplift of overburden and dilation of pre-existing fractures due to cyclic steam injection are likely to have facilitated the leakage events. As a result, integration of overburden characterization and monitoring with management of steam pressures may provide an effective means of risk mitigation of major leakage events.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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