MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2767906816 · doi:10.2118/188786-ms

Improving Pore Network Imaging & Characterization of Microporous Carbonate Rocks Using Multi-Scale Imaging Techniques

2017· article· en· W2767906816 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Hassan, Viswasanthi Chandra, M.P. Yutkin, Tadeusz W. Patzek, D. Nicolás Espinoza

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology
KeywordsMicroporous materialCharacterization (materials science)Scanning electron microscopeMaterials scienceDolomiteConfocal laser scanning microscopyMineralogyCarbonateMicroscopyGeologyNanotechnologyComposite materialBiomedical engineeringOpticsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Epoxy-pore casting is widely used to characterize geological samples. In this study, we present a robust pore imaging approach that applies Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM) to obtain high resolution 3D images of etched epoxy-pore casts of highly heterogeneous carbonates. In our approach, we have increased the depth of investigation for carbonates 20-fold, from 10 μm reported by (Fredrich, 1999; Shah et al., 2013) to 200 μm. In addition, high resolution 2D images from scanning electron microscopy (SEM) have been correlated with the 3D models from CLSM to develop a multi-scale imaging approach that covers a range of scales, from millimeters in 3D to micrometers in 2D. The developed approach was implemented to identify various pore types, e.g., the inter-crystalline and intra-granular microporosity, and the inter-boundary sheet pores in the limestone and dolomite samples.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis→French-language works237,207→