MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888882097 · doi:10.2118/190950-ms

Impact of Gas Lift Design in Unconventional Wells - A Delaware Basin Operator's Perspective

2018· article· en· W2888882097 on OpenAlexaff
Subash K Kannan, Matthew Boyer, Jeff Dufresne, Luis E. Gonzalez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsXenon Pharmaceuticals (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGas liftLift (data mining)Computer scienceProduction (economics)Industrial engineeringPetroleum engineeringEngineeringData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gas lift is becoming a predominant, intermediate term, artificial lift system in the Delaware and other basins. Besides the proper selection and management of the gas lift systems, design methodology is still a challenge due to the drastic change in flow conditions in the transient phase. The main objective of this paper is to develop a new methodology to design and optimize gas lift wells in unconventional reservoirs. A case study is provided to review, model, and analyze the current design over different stages of the well's production life. Consequently, application of new designs over different stages of the well's life will be implemented using a performance comparison which includes production and unloading scenarios. Actual well data will be used along with steady-state and dynamic modeling for unloading and production performance estimation. The models will be evaluated using actual data to perform history matching over different stages of the well's production life. This evaluation will also answer the following questions: Is the use of conventional mandrels the best option for these types of wells? Are the number of mandrels deployed using the traditional design methodology the correct solution? Are the tools used to design and analyze these types of wells sufficient? Most importantly, is more data required to create a better design and analysis? Also, this study compares the existing design to modified designs and justifies how the later could perform better. Integration of all data sources including historical performance, flowing bottom hole pressure, inferred dynamic IPR data, and the use of dynamic and nodal analysis tools for modeling while varying production conditions and unloading scenarios.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207