MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

3D inversion of electromagnetic logging-while-drilling data

2019· article· en· W2988282179 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsGeoscience BC
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogging while drillingInversion (geology)LoggingComputer scienceDrillingTransmitterDecoupling (probability)GeologyMeasurement while drillingWell loggingPetroleum engineeringSeismologyMechanical engineeringEngineeringTelecommunicationsControl engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SummaryElectromagnetic logging while drilling is commonly used to infer information about the electrical properties around the wellbore and to aid in geosteering. Data from modern tools, which combine multiple transmitter and receiver orientations and offsets, can be difficult to manually interpret in all but the simplest of environments. Inversion is required to optimally extract and use the information from this data. Although low dimensional inversions can provide useful information in certain environments, full, 3D solutions are required to extract the maximum possible amount of information from the data.In this work, we present the first fully 3D inversion of electromagnetic logging-while-drilling data. Moreover, we demonstrate that using semi-structured meshing and mesh decoupling, along with advanced data integration techniques, enables the inversions to be performed in real time.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it