MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909902000 · doi:10.4095/220864

Assessments of gas hydrate concentrations estimated from sonic logs in the JAPEX/JNOC/GSC et al. Mallik 5L-38 gas hydrate research production well

2005· report· en· W2909902000 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M W Lee, Timothy S. Collett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClathrate hydrateHydratePetroleum engineeringProduction (economics)ChemistryGeologyOrganic chemistryEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The amount of in situ gas hydrate in the pore spaces of sediments penetrated in the JAPEX/JNOC/GSC et al. Mallik 5L-38 well in the Mackenzie Delta, Canada, has been calculated from various well logs including compressional-wave velocity, shear-wave velocity, electrical resistivity, and nuclear magnetic resonance porosity logs. Gas hydrate concentrations estimated from acoustic logs compare favorably to estimates from resistivity and nuclear magnetic resonance porosity logs in sandy intervals; however, gas hydrate concentrations estimated from acoustic and nuclear magnetic resonance porosity logs differ noticeably within shaly intervals. Acoustic, resistivity, and nuclear magnetic resonance-derived gas hydrate concentrations are as much as 80 - 90% of pore space in clean sandstone intervals. The Poisson's ratio of gas-hydrate-bearing sediments is slightly higher than corresponding non-gas-hydrate-bearing sediments and the effect of gas hydrate on elastic velocities is dominated by the pore-filling characteristic and does not appear to cement sediment grains in this lithological setting.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207