MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754415742 · doi:10.36487/acg_repo/808_44

Coupling Geomechanics and Transport in Petroleum Engineering

2008· article· en· W2754415742 on OpenAlexaff
Maurice B. Dusseault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomechanicsPoromechanicsMechanicsCoupling (piping)Biot numberGeotechnical engineeringGeologyPhysicsEngineeringMechanical engineeringPorous mediumPorosity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transport-geomechanics coupling is of practical necessity in engineering when their mutual impact has a first-order impact (>10%) on results. In soil mechanics, most design or analysis issues do not meet this criterion, hence coupling may not be of practical value. In petroleum geomechanics, however, coupling is usually necessary because the compressibilities of the mineral, the fabric and the fluid are similar. Coupling involves a number of issues and levels. At one level, coupling of diffusion processes involves joint solution of heat flux, pressure propagation, ionic diffusion, and even electrical current effects. At the mechanics level, coupling these processes with geomechanics in a Biot poroelasticity formulation involves joint or iterative solution of the pressure, temperature and concentration fields along with the stress and strain field. At yet another level, there exist strong dependencies of transport properties on non-linear effects such as shear dilation, partial fabric collapse, joint aperture dilation, temperature and viscosity, and so on. Incorporating these non-linear effects into realistic mathematical modelling is the next major challenge in petroleum geomechanics.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.166 · 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
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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207