Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lapangan “Y” ditemukan melalui sumur pengeboran eksplorasi PMS 01 yang dibor pada 18 April 1980 dan diselesaikan pada 31 Juli 1980.Hal ini menyebabkan timbulnya pemikiran bagaimana strategi untuk mengembangkan lapangan guna meningkatkan recovery factor.Dalam menyelesaikan permasalahan ini dilakukan simulasi reservoir. Simulator yang digunakan adalah CMG-GEM yang dibuat oleh Computer Modelling Group Ltd., Calgary, Canada. Simulator tersebut adalah simulator jenis komposisional.Langkah awal dalam tahap simulasi adalah pengumpulan, persiapan, dan pengolahan data. Pengumpulan data meliputi data geologi, batuan, fluida, ekuilibrium dan data produksi. Proses inisialisasi merupakan tahapan setelah pemasukkan data yaitu proses pengkondisian model supaya selaras dengan kondisi awal reservoir yaitu dengan menyelaraskan OGIP hasil perhitungan simulator dengan perhitungan volumetrik. Proses inisialisasi menghasilkan harga OGIP simulasi sebesar 23.03 Bscf dan untuk perhitungan volumetrik adalah 23.07 Bcsf, hal ini menunjukan perbedaan kurang dari 1 %. Perbedaan yang sangat kecil tersebut memperlihatkan bahwa hasil simulasi sudah sangat memadai. Validasi data juga dilakukan dengan proses history matching (penyelarasan). Proses penyelarasan data produksi (laju produksi terhadap waktu dan kumulatif produksi terhadap waktu) dan tekanan menghasilkan kurva yang selaras.Peramalan perilaku produksi reservoir dilakukan dengan membuat beberapa skenario produksi. Ada usulan tiga skenario, yaitu Skenario A, reservoir diproduksikan oleh satu sumur PMS 01 dengan membuka perforasi pada zona 12 dan zona 15 (base case), Skenario B, reservoir diproduksikan oleh PMS 01 dengan membuka perforasi pada zona 12, zona 15 dan zona 16. Skenario C, reservoir diproduksikan oleh dua sumur yaitu sumur PMS 01 (zona 12, zona 15 dan zona16) dan sumur PMS 03 (zona 12, zona 15 dan zona 16). Berdasarkan skenario yang dilakukan diperoleh kumulatif produksi terbesar pada skenario C sebesar 16.2 Bscf atau dengan recovery factor sebesar 70.22 %. The "Y" field was discovered through an exploration drilling well PMS 01 which was drilled on April 18, 1980 and completed on July 31, 1980. This led to the emergence of ideas on how to develop a field to improve recovery factors. In solving this problem reservoir simulations were carried out. The simulator used is the CMG-GEM made by Computer Modeling Group Ltd., Calgary, Canada. The simulator is a compositional type simulator. The first step in the simulation stage is data collection, preparation, and processing. Data collection includes geological, rock, fluid, equilibrium and production data. The initialization process is the stage after data entry, namely the model conditioning process so that it is aligned with the initial reservoir conditions by aligning the OGIP results of the simulator calculation with the volumetric calculation. The initialization process produces a simulation OGIP price of 23.03 Bscf and for volumetric calculations is 23.07 Bcsf, this shows a difference of less than 1%. The small difference shows that the simulation results are very adequate. Data validation is also carried out with the history matching process. The process of aligning production data (production rate with respect to time and cumulative production with respect to time) and pressure produces a harmonious curve. Forecasting of reservoir production behavior is carried out by creating several production scenarios. There are three proposed scenarios, namely Scenario A, the reservoir is produced by one well PMS 01 by opening perforation in zone 12 and zone 15 (base case), Scenario B, the reservoir is produced by PMS 01 by opening the perforation in zone 12, zone 15 and zone 16 Scenario C, the reservoir is produced by two wells namely PMS 01 wells (zone 12, zone 15 and zone16) and PMS 03 wells (zone 12, zone 15 and zone 16). Based on the scenario, the largest cumulative production obtained in scenario C is 16.2 Bscf or with a recovery factor of 70.22%.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
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".