Quantitative Characterization of Shale Porosities of Different Origins by Integrating Pore Genesis and Logging Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, a new and pragmatic technique has been developed to identify pore types and characterize porosities of shales with various origins. By comparing the genesis of pore types (i.e., organic, brittle, and clay mineral porosities) in shales, the corresponding pore volumes per unit mass are determined as a function of the total porosity, density, and the content of each pore type from core samples. Subsequently, a new inverse framework was proposed and successfully applied to quantify different types of porosities in the Silurian Longmaxi formation shale in the Zhaotong area. The pore volume per unit mass of organic matter is calculated to be around 0.185–0.190 cm3/g, which is 10–21 and 8–19 times more than that of brittle mineral and clay mineral, respectively, indicating that pore space of organic matter contributes greater to the total porosity than that of the clay and brittle minerals. Using single well data, the porosity in organic matter is found to follow the same pattern as the total porosity in the vertical direction. Such an identified porosity type leads to more accurate sweet spots as well as more appropriate drilling locations for horizontal wells in shale reservoirs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".