MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3130863145 · doi:10.4095/327948

Overpressure detection from geophysical, drilling and well testing data for petroleum exploration wells in the Beaufort-Mackenzie Basin, Yukon and Northwest Territories

2021· report· en· W3130863145 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kezhen Hu, D R Issler, Zhuoheng Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyOverpressureDrillingBeaufort seaStructural basinPetroleum explorationPetroleumPetroleum engineeringGeomorphologyOceanographySeismologyPaleontologyArcticEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A comprehensive database consisting of geophysical data, drilling mud weights, and subsurface temperature, and formation pressure measurements was compiled and utilized to detect the depth to top of overpressure for the petroleum exploration wells in the Beaufort-Mackenzie Basin. One hundred and fifty-two depths to the top of overpressure were determined for 112 wells by using geophysical methods, supplemented with drilling and geothermal data. The majority of overpressure picks were confirmed using measured pore fluid pressure data. An additional 36 wells are believed to be too shallow to have penetrated an underlying overpressured zone. Composite plots for each well are presented graphically with wireline logs, well seismic velocities, mud weights, and borehole temperatures to illustrate the geophysical, drilling and geothermal responses and their correlations with well testing data, thus providing multi-parameter evidence for an integrated interpretation of overpressure distribution. Overpressure interpretations were ranked based on the availability and quality of the various types of data, as well as the reliability of the different methods used. Among the geophysical data that are good indicators of overpressure occurrences, shale sonic transit-time (and transformed porosity) and continuous sonic velocity are preferred because of the abundance of these data and the sensitivity of rock acoustic properties to porosity and stress. Mud weights provide an upper estimate of in situ pore pressure because of the need to approximately balance formation pressures during drilling; interpretations based on mud weights are mostly consistent with the results from geophysical data and measured fluid pressures from well tests. The interpreted depth to the top of overpressure varies from <1000 to over 4500 m (GL/SL) and is largely confined to undercompacted sediments in the central-northern delta and offshore areas. Overpressure occurs predominantly within the Paleogene Aklak, Taglu, Richards, and Kugmallit sequences, but can reach the base of the Plio-Pleistocene Iperk Sequence in wells on the outer shelf in the deep-water region of the Beaufort Sea. Our refined interpretations of overpressure occurrence in exploration wells provide key control points for more detailed mapping and modelling of overpressures in the basin.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.256
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis→French-language works237,207→