Lateral correlation of sediment facies in the Panuke and Venture fields, Scotian Basin: implications for reservoir connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gamma logs and conventional core have been correlated in Upper Jurassic - Lower Cretaceous deltaic successions from closely spaced wells in two areas of the Scotian Basin: around the Panuke and Cohasset fields, and the West Venture-Venture fields. In the Panuke-Cohasset area, the Como P-21, Panuke B-90, Cohasset A-52, Balmoral M-32, and Lawrence D-14 wells, located 3 - 8 km apart, have been correlated in the upper part of the Missisauga Formation and the Cree Member of the Logan Canyon Formation. In the West Venture-Venture area, the West Olympia O-51, West Venture N-91, West Venture C-62, Venture B-52, and Venture H-22 wells, located 2.5 to 11.5 km apart, have been correlated in the Lower Member of the Missisauga Formation. This precise correlation of cores is provided by lithologically similar transgressive surfaces in the form of shelf lag deposits or coals. In both areas, they make effective benchmarks with which to correlate equivalent packages above and below these surfaces, but some transgressive surfaces are of limited extent, and may represent delta progradation and subsequent distributary switching rather than regional changes in sea level. Further correlation indicates that major sandstone packets are laterally correlative (15 km in the Panuke - Cohasset area, and up to 27 km in the West Venture - Venture area), but commonly show lateral changes in lithofacies. For example, at the top of the Missisauga Formation tidal channel sandstones bioturbated by Ophiomorpha at Panuke B-90 pass laterally into thin-bedded by-passing river-mouth turbidites at Cohasset A-52 and thicker bedded delta-front turbidites at Lawrence D-14, over a distance of 15 km. In the Venture Field, lateral continuity is determined by the margins of incised valleys, however continuous sandstone packages that overly the valleys can be correlated up to 27 km, implying that reservoir connectivity may not be limited by the incised valleys. The application of a standard lithofacies scheme in well correlation provided useful information about reservoir shape and conductivity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".