Influences of Anisotropy on Shale Brittleness Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Shale brittleness is one of the most important parameters to assess how the shale behaves upon subjecting to applied stress and evaluate the hydraulic fracturing treatment. Presence of lamination is a common feature in organic-rich shales which significantly create anisotropy in elastic properties and rock brittleness due to the platy minerals such as clays that have the tendency to be aligned in parallel orientation during burial and the digenesis process. Characterization of anisotropy and the understanding the controlling factors on the reservoir rock elastic properties, rock strength and rock brittleness are crucial for successful production and development of shales. The objective of this paper is to extend the previous discussion by (Ibrahim et al 2019), in which an integrated approach has been developed for evaluating the shale fracability, to explain the influences of shale lamination and emphasize on the effects of anisotropic in elastic properties on brittleness of organic-rich shales to better demonstrate the process of screening hydraulic fracturing candidate intervals and improve the hydraulic fracturing design which can eventually improve the production forecast. In this paper, we propose the vertical transverse isotropic (VTI) modeling to investigate the effect of shale lamination and anisotropy on rock elastic properties, tensile failure and wave velocity normal to bedding plane, which differ than they are when parallel to bedding plane. Throughout this study, it is observed that there is a remarkable effect of anisotropy parameters on rock elastic properties and tensile failure. This method help obtain more accurte brittleness index and give precise guide to optimize perforation depths choice and hydraulic fracturing design that can result in optimized hydrocarbon productivity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".