Source Mechanism and Stress Inversion for Hydraulic Fracturing Induced Microseismicity in Glutenite Reservoir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The microseismicity associated with hydraulic fracturing in unconventional reservoir (i.e. shale gas play) has been investigated in the past several decades. Few experimental studies with respect to the focal mechanism and stress inversion was conducted, especially for Glutenite reservoir. In this study, the glutenite core was taken from the underground of 2600 m. Next, we performed scaled hydraulic fracturing tests on the cubic core (50×50×50mm) under geological principle stress condition in true tri-axial stress cell. Meanwhile, we monitored wellbore and pore pressure, and micro-seismic events during the fracture propagation from six faces of the cubic rock. Micro-seismic survey and events were interpreted to identify the induced fractures distribution in three dimension. Source mechanism and stress inversion were analyzed by moment tensor decomposition. The correlation of failure plane from microseismicity and tested sample implied that the microseismic events were accurately localized. The distribution of microseismic events from secondary and reopening tests indicated that the hydraulic fracturing induced microseismicity are mainly caused by significant tip effect (i.e. reactivate preexisting natural fractures). Based on source mechanism analysis, we found that the most of the failure are dominated by double-couple (DC). The correlation between original principle stress state and the one from STESI inversion indicated that the direction of principle stresses, especially for σ2 and σ3 inversed from reopening test, can be highly influenced by the hydraulic induced fracture or weak planes during secondary fracturing test.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".