A program to calculate the state of stress in the vicinity of an inclined borehole through an anisotropic rock formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT A borehole existing in any geologic formation concentrates the far-field tectonic and overburden stresses amplifying the magnitudes of certain stress components near the borehole. It is important to understand the magnitudes and patterns of this stress concentration because these lead to damage and can even collapse the borehole if sufficiently strong. The solution of the stress distributed near a borehole can be complicated considering the elastic anisotropy of rocks. We have developed programs (ASCIB3D) in MATLAB and Python to model the stress distribution around an inclined borehole in an arbitrarily oriented anisotropic medium. The program is built on the Lekhnitskij-Amadei solution. The input orientation of the far-field stresses and the elastic stiffness matrix of the medium into the program are geology angles instead of the rotation angles shown in previous studies, making the code more convenient for users. The sign convention for the inverse function, which is ignored in previous studies, is discussed in detail. The results indicate that the program ASCIB3D is a useful tool for modeling the stress distributed around an inclined borehole in the anisotropic formation and analyzing the effect of anisotropy and borehole inclination on stress distribution. The inclination and azimuth of the borehole and the anisotropy of the rocks affect the orientation and strength of the stress concentration.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".