Modeling hydraulic fracture in heterogeneous rock materials using permeability-based hydraulic fracture model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydraulic fracturing is one of the most important techniques for enhancing oil/gas production. The permeability-based hydraulic fracture (PHF) model, which is based on the smeared-crack method and considers the interaction between the pore pressure and solid phase, is adopted in the present study for a fully-coupled simulation of the hydraulic fracture in a heterogeneous rock formation. The level set method (LSM), which is used to describe the distribution of material properties of heterogeneous rocks, is coupled with the PHF model. Using the coupled PHF–LSM model, a series of finite element method (FEM) simulations are carried out to investigate the characteristics of a hydraulic fracture (e.g., the breakdown pressure and fracture propagation) in heterogeneous rocks. Three types of heterogeneous rocks are examined: layered rock, rock with distributed inclusions, and rock with random spatial variations in the material properties. The results of the numerical simulations show that the coupled PHF–LSM model can describe the material interface without changing the FEM mesh used to discretize the physical domain. Further, the model effectively simulates hydraulic-fracturing problems for various heterogeneous rocks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".