MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2726907866 · doi:10.1061/9780784480779.150

Permeability Estimation in Chalk Using NMR and a Modified Kozeny Equation

2017· article· en· W2726907866 on OpenAlexaff
Leonardo Teixeira Pinto Meireles, M. Monzurul Alam, Ida Lykke Fabricius

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermeability (electromagnetism)Relative permeabilityGeologyPetroleum engineeringGeotechnical engineeringChemistryPorosityMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An NMR logging-based permeability estimator was implemented for chalk. Several authors have identified the inability of accurate prediction of permeability from NMR logs in carbonates. Current models (namely Coates and SDR) may yield unreliable permeability data and require extensive calibration of parameters. Also, calibration requires data from core analysis, which undermines one of the key advantages of the technology: minimizing the need of expensive coring runs. A modified Kozeny method is used for permeability estimation from NMR logs. Unlike the model of Coates and SDR, does not require calibration. To translate the T2 relaxation distribution into pore size, an analogy is made between the NMR T2 data and the MICP output. Specific surface data acquired by the Brunauer Emmett Teller method (BET) was used to aid the interpretation of the surface relaxivity. The model was tested in a chalk reservoir borehole in the North Sea, for which NMR logs and permeability data for 4 core plugs are available. Results achieved using the modified Kozeny equation are in better agreement with the Klinkenberg permeability of core plugs than both the SDR and Coates methods. They are also superior to the results found by the application of Kozeny's equation when used without input from NMR data.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNMR spectroscopy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207