Sand Production Management during Marine Natural Gas Hydrate Exploitation: Review and an Innovative Solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural gas hydrate (NGH) is widely distributed worldwide with great reserves and is generally accepted as a promising alternative energy source. However, sustainable, efficient, and safe NGH development has been proven to be restricted by a series of geomechanical problems, among which sand production has become prominent and attention-catching. This review systematically summarizes the up-to-date literatures and reports our latest work to improve the fundamental understandings of the sand production issues in NGH development. It is noted that sand production is defined as a systematic “issue”, rather than a “problem” in this paper, considering both the adverse and favorable influences of sand production on continuous gas production from hydrate-bearing sediment (HBS). Several challenges and insightful suggestions are put forward for future research from the viewpoint of the sand production management system (SMS). Furthermore, an innovative method for unlocking conflicts between sand production and gas extraction in muddy HBS is proposed, namely, the gravel-huff to clay-puff replacement (GCR) technique. The outlook and perspectives of this technique are presented, as well as the key challenges to be resolved.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".