Hydrocarbon potential of the uppermost Cretaceous-Tertiary succession of Western Canada Sedimentary Basin: Preliminary conceptual synthesis of background data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hydrocarbon potential of the upper Cretaceous/Tertiary was first realized in the 1880s with the discovery of gas at Medicine Hat, followed by the discovery of oil at Pembina in the 1950s. Development continues today with active exploration for shallow gas and coal-bed methane in central Alberta. Although thousands of wells have penetrated these strata and 1700 oil and gas pools have been discovered, they are still vastly under-explored because they represent such an enormous volume of rock with excellent further potential which has not been a focus of active exploration until recently. A large volume of gas, distributed through a large number of pools, is estimated yet to be discovered. Laterally extensive and mappable reservoir trends and shallow drilling depth ensure scientific and economic success in gas exploration, and coal-bed methane and biogenic gas are emerging concepts with further potential. Low reservoir pressure, modest pool size, drilling damage and the lack of basic geological work on several prospective units are challenges to be overcome.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".