Experience in North America Tight Oil Reserves Development. Horizontal Wells and Multistage Hydraulic Fracturing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The accelerated development of horizontal drilling technology in combination with the multistage hydraulic fracturing of the reservoir has expanded the geological conditions for commercial oil production from tight reservoirs in North America. Geological and physical characteristics of tight reservoirs in North America are presented, as well as a comparison of the geological and physical properties of the reservoirs of the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin and the Volga-Ural oil and gas province, in particular, in the territory of Tatarstan. The similarity of these basins is shown in terms of formation and deposition. New drilling technologies for horizontal wells (HW) and multistage hydraulic fracturing are considered. The drilling in tight reservoirs is carried out exclusively on hydrocarbon-based muds The multi-stage fracturing technology with the use of sliding sleeves, and also slick water – a low-viscous carrier for proppant is the most effective solution for conditions similar to tight reservoirs in the Devonian formation of Tatarstan. Tax incentives which are actively used for the development of HW and multistage fracturing technologies in Canada are described. wells, multistage fracturing
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".