MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607865193 · doi:10.3968/9448

Laboratory Experiment on Inaccessible Pore Volume of Polymer Flooding

2017· article· en· W2607865193 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in petroleum exploration and development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymerVolume (thermodynamics)KeroseneMaterials scienceMolecular massElectromagnetic coilMolar mass distributionChemical engineeringMineralogyComposite materialPolymer chemistryChemistryThermodynamicsOrganic chemistryPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research on inaccessible pore volume is completed on the basis of laboratory experiments. The experiment prepared 4 different kinds of polymers, whose molecular weight are 8 million, 12 million, 16 million and 20 million whose molecular coil size are measured by light blockage counter. Through kerosene mass method we can get pore cumulative distribution of field cores and finally plot the relation between the inaccessible pore volume and molecular coil size of polymer. The size of small pore where primary water was taken as the minimum number polymer coils can be passed. Then the polymer molecular weight with better compatibility with rock pores is optimized. The study shows with the increase of polymer relative molecular mass, pore volume increased linearly. The conclusion can better guide the selection of the polymers in practical production.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.259 · 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