Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Since their initial discovery in the 1960’s, gas hydrates have been considered to be an important potential source of unconventional natural gas. Significant progress has been made relative to our understanding of the geologic and engineering controls on the ultimate energy potential of gas hydrate; however, more work is required to realize the promise of gas hydrates as a future energy source. Gas hydrates have been encountered, recovered or inferred to exist in numerous sedimentary basins in Arctic permafrost settings, regions of alpine permafrost, marine sediments of outer continental margins and in deep lakes. Despite the great abundance of potential gas hydrate resources in the world, a large portion of these resources reside in clay-rich sediments and fracture dominated reservoir systems, and are not generally considered producible with existing technology, but may have future potential with the emergence of new technologies. For a large portion of the world, gas hydrate in sand reservoirs have become a viable production target and the focus of the first production testing efforts. Production tests in Arctic Canada (Mackenzie Delta) and Alaska have shown that gas can be produced from highly-concentrated gas hydrate accumulations in coarse-grained (i.e., sand rich) reservoir systems with conventional production technologies. Production can be achieved through the depressurization method and by more complex methods such as molecular substitution (e.g., CO2-CH4 exchange). In 2013, the gas hydrate production test was conducted in a marine setting in the offshore of Japan. An additional test was conducted in Japan in 2017 to further evaluate alternative well completion technologies. Also in 2018, China initiated a 60-day gas hydrate production test in the Shenhu region of the South China Sea. This report reviews the results of gas hydrate engineering and production testing studies associated with the Mallik, Mount Elbert, and Iġnik Sikumi projects in northern Canada and Alaska. The results of the marine gas hydrate producing testing efforts in the Nankai Trough (Japan) and in the South China Sea (China) are also summarized.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".