Scaling Criteria for Waterflooding and Immiscible CO2 Flooding in Heavy Oil Reservoirs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scaling criteria have been developed and validated to evaluate performance of waterflooding and immiscible CO2 flooding in heavy oil reservoirs by using a three-dimensional (3D) sandpacked displacement model. Experimentally, the 3D physical model consisting of a pair of horizontal wells together with five vertical wells is used to conduct waterflooding and immiscible CO2 flooding processes, respectively. Theoretically, mathematical formulae have been developed for waterflooding and immiscible CO2 flooding by performing dimensional and inspectional analyses. The scaling group of the gravitational force to viscous force is found to be negligible when scaling up a model to its prototype. The relaxed scaling criteria are validated by comparing the simulation results of a synthetic reservoir with experimental measurements and then extended for a field application. There also exists a reasonably good agreement between the laboratory measurements and the field application with the determined scaling criteria.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it