MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918031264 · doi:10.2118/0517-0022-jpt

E&P Notes (May 2017)

2017· article· en· W2918031264 on OpenAlex
Joel Parshall, Stephen Whitfield, Trent Jacobs

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

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceDrillingPresentation (obstetrics)Big dataPetroleum industryFossil fuelWork (physics)EngineeringEngineering managementComputer scienceWaste managementMechanical engineeringEnvironmental engineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E&P Notes Nanotechnology Could See Big Future in Water Cleanup Joel Parshall, JPT Features Editor Nanotechnology could have a big future as a tool for upstream oil and gas and other industries to use to clean up contaminated water, Professor Michael S. Wong of Rice University, Houston, told the SPE Gulf Coast Section’s R&D Study Group recently. Wong, chair of the university’s chemical and biomolecular engineering department, said that the multidisciplinary nanotechnology field has sufficiently matured to enable researchers and practitioners to envision real prospective solutions to water contamination problems. Water is by far the largest byproduct of the fossil fuel industry. Wong’s presentation noted that in the US, oil industry well operations produce in aggregate approximately 10 times as much water as they do oil, and in Canada the water/oil ratio is 14 to 1. Workforce Education Key To Understanding Drilling Data Stephen Whitfield, Senior Staff Writer In trying to remove risk and uncertainty from drilling and improve their overall drilling efficiency, operators are developing more reliable analytic capabilities and adopting novel sensor and data-streaming technologies to help them process the massive amounts of data coming from their wells. An industry expert said that workforce education will be critical to helping companies adapt to a changing data landscape and optimize their operations. At a presentation held by the SPE Drilling and Uncertainty Technical Section, Eric van Oort discussed the issues involved in analyzing data for drilling optimization, and the work being done at the University of Texas at Austin to help ease the process. Van Oort is a professor of petroleum engineering at the UT-Austin and a former onshore gas technology manager at Shell. Digital Image Correlation: A New Way To Look at Hydraulic Fracturing Trent Jacobs, JPT Digital Editor Digital image correlation (DIC) is routinely used in modern mechanical engineering to analyze the strength of building materials. Geologists have used the technology for the same reason in the study of mines. Now, researchers from the University of Louisiana at Lafayette are making the case that DIC can also help petroleum engineers—specifically those in the business of hydraulic fracturing. The ultimate aim: an index of unconventional rock types based on a quantification of their ability to be stimulated, or what oil and gas producers simply call “fracability.” DIC technology has a few variations, but this application involved the coupling of a high-speed camera with commercial change-tracking software. This simple approach allowed researchers to see frame-by-frame how lines of strain building up inside compressed rock samples directly correlated to where fractures would form a few seconds later.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.255 · 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