MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990409485 · doi:10.2118/1219-0049-jpt

Technology Focus: Reserves Management

2019· article· en· W2990409485 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barbara Pribyl, Greg Horton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransparency (behavior)Maturity (psychological)Resource (disambiguation)Process (computing)Petroleum industryProject managementRelevance (law)Computer scienceResource management (computing)Process managementBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringSystems engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology Focus Benjamin Franklin once said, “When you are finished changing, you’re finished.” Our industry must continue to improve and evolve to face the challenges of economic and commercial viability, greater transparency, environmental responsibility, and social acceptance. The papers in this month’s Reserves Management feature explore new and novel ideas to maintain social and environmental relevance, maximize value from unconventional projects, and ensure that exploration and appraisal activity is designed to optimize decision-making in resource project management.• Paper SPE 195298 describes a methodical way to show resource project movement through the recently updated (2018) Petroleum Resources Management System (PRMS) and Canadian Oil and Gas Engineering Handbook (COGEH). Not only does this facilitate a consistent approach for entities to classify their resources, but also provides guidance about how to subclassify resources through a technical and commercial analysis. Subclassification on the basis of project maturity is now recommended by the PRMS 2018 to provide greater transparency of the chance of commerciality, particularly for contingent resources. Moreover, it is important to be able to describe the associated chance of commerciality and defend the reasonableness of development assumptions and resource assignment; otherwise, projects should be considered Unrecoverable. Each entity will need to develop the process to their own specific needs. Paper SPE 191455 is an excellent case study using data analysis to evaluate how the industry has evolved through continuous improvement over the last 12 years. The study was conducted using multivariate analysis tools to try and look objectively at the data, and with 12,000 wells to draw from, there was a significant amount of data to analyze. It is a lesson in what is required in determining the best completion technique for the right reservoir; one needs to drill a great many wells. While the study is related to improvements of projects already in the Reserves class, it illustrates the principles of the Technology Under Development process as it applies to Contingent•resources. Paper OTC 28312 is an excellent Australian example of the oil and gas industry collaborating with scientific research institutions to collect data that can be used not only to assess the integrity of subsea infrastructure to guide decommissioning strategies, but also to contribute to a broader understanding of our oceans and marine ecology. In an increasingly complex and uncertain global environment, it makes sense for oil and gas entities to look at ways of collaborating with scientific institutions and other industries for mutual benefit. This should facilitate greater community acceptance and can demonstrate that industry is undertaking responsible scientific, social, and environmental management. A win-win! Recommended additional reading at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org. SPE 193717 Economic Benefits of Implementing Alternative Energy:• A Heavy Oil Fields Case Study by Mohammad Al-Yatama, Kuwait Oil Company, et al. IPTC 19506 Total Well Management: Maximizing Well Life Cycle Value—A Regulator Perspective by Ryan Guillory, Petronas, et al.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207