MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772669269 · doi:10.1190/int-2017-0134.1

Seismic reservoir characterization of Utica-Point Pleasant Shale with efforts at quantitative interpretation — A case study: Part 1

2017· article· en· W2772669269 on OpenAlexaff
Satinder Chopra, Ritesh Kumar Sharma, Hossein Nemati, James Keay

Bibliographic record

VenueInterpretation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsARC Resources (Canada)University of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrophysicsOil shaleGeologyBrittlenessSeismic inversionMineralogyInversion (geology)Poisson's ratioPoisson distributionSpecies richnessReservoir modelingLithologyTotal organic carbonPetrologyPorositySeismologySoil sciencePetroleum engineeringGeotechnical engineeringPaleontologyStatisticsGeometryChemistryMathematicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Utica Shale is one of the major source rocks in Ohio, and it extends across much of the eastern United States. Its organic richness, high content of calcite, and development of extensive organic porosity make it a perfect unconventional play, and it has gained the attention of the oil and gas industry. The primary target zone in the Utica Play includes the Utica Formation, Point Pleasant Formation, and Trenton Formation intervals. We attempt to identify the sweet spots within the Point Pleasant interval using 3D seismic data, available well data, and other relevant data. This has been done by way of organic richness and brittleness estimation in the rock intervals. The organic richness is determined by weight % of total organic carbon content, which is derived by transforming the inverted density volume. Core-log petrophysical modeling provides the necessary relationship for doing so. The brittleness is derived using rock-physics parameters such as the Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio. Deterministic simultaneous inversion along with a neural network approach are followed to compute the rock-physics parameters and density using seismic data. The correlation of sweet spots identified based on the seismic data with the available production data emphasizes the significance of integration of seismic data with all other relevant 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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterpretationSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207