MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940893427 · doi:10.4043/29458-ms

How Digital Engineering and Cross-Industry Knowledge Transfer is Reducing Project Execution Risks in Oil and Gas

2019· article· en· W2940893427 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Jonathan Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueOffshore Technology Conference · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsSNC-Lavalin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceFossil fuelKnowledge transferPetroleum industryLead (geology)Risk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceBusinessEngineering managementKnowledge managementEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Technology has transformed the energy industry over the last 60 years. It has made processes more efficient, employees more productive and crucially, it has improved the safety of both workers and facilities. In a mature industry, such as oil and gas, operators and owners are faced with the challenge of safely and efficiently managing their ageing plant and assets. This challenge is compounded by poor historic records and information, and the potential loss of knowledge as the current workforce retires. Coupled with the increasing requirement for high levels of design assurance and confidence in solutions, and the constant pressure to deliver value, faster and cheaper; companies are constantly looking at the latest technological advances, and to other industry sectors, for possible solutions. This paper explores, through case studies, how the latest digital modelling and visualisation techniques are being innovatively deployed to enhance design, delivery and operations in the oil and gas sector. SNC-Lavalin have been uniquely deploying these technologies into the nuclear sector, where access time is highly-limited due to nuclear radiation. This learning has been brought to the oil and gas sector, and is an exemplar of cross-industry working and knowledge transfer.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOffshore Technology ConferenceSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207