MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895195275 · doi:10.2110/sedred.2018.3.4

Fluvial architecture of the Burro Canyon Formation using UAV-based photogrammetry and outcrop-based modeling: implications for reservoir performance, Rattlesnake Canyon, southwestern Piceance Basin, Colorado

2018· article· en· W2895195275 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Sedimentary Record · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanyonFluvialOutcropGeologyFaciesCretaceousStructural basinGeomorphologyPhotogrammetryArchitecturePaleontologyArchaeologyRemote sensingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stratigraphic variability of fluvial architectural elements and their internal lithological and petrophysical heterogeneity influence static connectivity and fluid flow. To explore the impact of fluvial architecture and facies heterogeneity on reservoir performance, well-exposed outcrops of the Cretaceous Burro Canyon Formation in Rattlesnake Canyon, Colorado, are evaluated. Analysis of the sedimentology and channel architecture of the Burro Canyon Formation provides insights into the low net- to-gross ratio, sandy, braided-fluvial style. The Burro Canyon Formation represents a South Saskatchewan type, perennial, braided fluvial system. A single depositional sequence is present in Rattlesnake Canyon containing a series of stacked amalgamated and semi-amalgamated channel complexes, composed of four architectural elements: amalgamated channel complexes, amalgamated fluvial-bar deposits, isolated fluvial-bar deposits, and floodplain fines.
\nStratigraphic measured sections, outcrop gamma-ray measurements, and UAV- based (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle-based) photogrammetry are used to constrain two- dimensional (2-D) and three-dimensional (3-D) static reservoir models of the fluvial deposits. Resulting breakthrough times (BTT) and sweep efficiency suggest subsurface performance is most effective perpendicular to paleoflow direction in amalgamated channel sequences. Perpendicular to paleoflow, BTT occurs 9% faster than parallel to the paleoflow and sweep efficiency is, on average, 16% greater. Sweep efficiency and BTT are greater perpendicular to paleoflow due to greater sandstone connectivity in this orientation. Variability of preserved channels and lateral pitchouts results in lower recovery efficiency. Reservoir heterogeneity can account for 50% variation in BTT and
\nlower recovery efficiency by 5% through low petrophysical zones that trap fluids. Cemented conglomeratic facies decrease recovery efficiency by 15%, but increase sweep efficiency and BTT by 28% and 32%, respectively, creating fluid-flow barriers as conglomeratic facies fill basal scours in the Burro Canyon Formation.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.202 · 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