MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2950858874 · doi:10.22107/jpg.2019.88407

Redeveloping Mature Fractured Carbonate Reservoirs

2019· article· en· W2950858874 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maurice B. Dusseault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringGeologyCarbonatePermeability (electromagnetism)Oil in placeCompletion (oil and gas wells)Enhanced oil recoveryRedevelopmentMining engineeringPetroleumEngineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Naturally fractured carbonate reservoirs (NFCRs) comprise the majority of the oil and gas reservoirs around the Persian Gulf.  Many of these reservoirs have a long history of exploitation, but vast amounts of oil remain in place.  A major redevelopment process for light oil based NFRs will likely be the use of horizontal wells combined with gravity drainage at constant pressure based on voidage replacement with natural gas (top-down) and natural bottom water drive or deliberate bottom water injection (bottom up), or controlled flank water invasion for reservoirs with adequate dip.  The excellent recovery factors achieved in Alberta NFCRs depends on appropriate well placement, careful voidage replacement management, and continuous monitoring of pressures, rates and fluid ratios. Geomechanical aspects of such a redevelopment approach may involve the placing of horizontal wells in orientations conducive to small-scale well stimulation activities revolving around hydraulic fracturing.  Such fracturing helps guarantee that sufficient aperture vertical channels are available so that stable gravity drainage can develop and give adequate production rates per well. The proposed approach and information needs for the proper placement of wells and appropriate stimulation practices are outlined.  In particular, good understanding of reservoir permeability distribution, water/oil interfaces, lithology data, and in situ stress field data are needed, and this is more challenging in reservoirs that have already gone through some amount of pressure depletion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis→French-language works237,207→