MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597374712 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201600790

A Visual Framework for Reservoir Connectivity Analysis

2016· article· en· W2597374712 on OpenAlexaff
Roberta Cabral Mota, Hamidreza Hamdi, Mário Costa Sousa, Ehud Sharlin, Zhangxin Chen

Bibliographic record

Venue78th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2016 · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorkflowFlooding (psychology)Reservoir modelingSoftwareData miningWater floodingStatic analysisPath (computing)Distributed computingGeologyPetroleum engineeringProgramming languageDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Static connectivity measures have been proposed for quick evaluation of reservoir performance to provide a potentially important link between the reservoir characterization and the simulation studies. These measures are easy in concept and inexpensive in execution, and create an important, intermediate level in the assessment of reservoir productivity. This paper proposes a framework for static connectivity analysis in reservoirs that use water flooding technique and pressure propagation fronts as it used in well testing. The software uses a fast marching method and a shortest path algorithm that both are sensitive to geological heterogeneities which can give some insights into finding the connective geobodies. An illustrative example is shown to describe the software interface and to present a simple but systematic connectivity analysis scenario. The distinct tasks contained in a typical reservoir development workflow may be benefited from the addition of connectivity analysis, such as the assessment of optimum well placements for injection-production wells and the evaluation of features of stratigraphic architectures that affect the recovery. The proposed tool is towards providing a geoengineering approach to use the geological knowledge for proposing better production scenarios.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.006

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue78th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2016Same topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207