MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139185554 · doi:10.15372/rgg2020127

The Anyue Giant Gas Field in the Sichuan Basin as the Largest Gas Field in Marine Carbonate Deposits from Domestic China

2020· article· en· W3139185554 on OpenAlexaff
Guoqi Wei, Jiapei Du, C. Zou, Chengyuan Xu, Wei Yang, Wei Xie, Songtao Wu, Zecheng Wang, Nan Su, Shouxiang Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueRussian Geology and Geophysics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSichuan basinNatural gas fieldGeologyNatural gasCarbonateLithologyDrillingGeochemistryWet gasPetroleum engineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract —The Anyue gas field is located in the middle part of the Sichuan Basin, SW China. It occurs in the oldest marine carbonate strata and is characterized by the highest degree of thermal evolution and the largest gas reserves in China. A significant breakthrough was made with the Gaoshi-1 risk-taking exploration well deployed in 2011. As of 2015, the proven geologic reserves of natural gas were 657.4 billion m3, and the total gas reserves including proven reserves, controlled reserves, and predicted reserves exceeded 1.5 trillion m3. A total of three sets of gas-bearing strata are developed in the Anyue gas field in a descending sequence: The gas reservoir in the Cambrian Longwangmiao Formation (Є1l) is treated as a structure-lithologic gas reservoir; the gas reservoir in Section No. 4 of the Dengying Formation (Z2dn4) is a structure-stratigraphic gas reservoir; and the gas reservoir in Section No. 2 of the Dengying Formation (Z2dn2) is a structural gas reservoir. A comparative analysis of the gas sources has shown that the gas Cambrian of reservoirs was mainly from mudshale of the lower Cambrian Maidiping and Qiongzhusi formations and the gas of the Dengying Formation reservoirs was from mudshale of the Qiongzhusi Formation and mudstone of Section No. 3 of the Dengying Formation. All gas reservoirs are referred to as reservoirs of dry gas with medium or low contents of sulfur and medium contents of CO2. Gas reservoirs in Є1l are characterized by a large burial depth, a high temperature, and a high pressure, while the gas reservoirs in Z2dn2 and Z2dn4 are characterized by an ultralarge depth, a high temperature, and a normal pressure. The accumulation of gas reservoirs is controlled mainly by two factors. The distribution of hydrocarbon generation centers is controlled by the late Sinian–early Cambrian intracratonic rift, which acts as effective updip sealing conditions for gas reservoirs in the Dengying Formation. The late Sinian–early Cambrian Gaoshiti–Moxi paleouplift experienced a long-term inherited development, which controlled the generation and distribution of three sets of large-scale high-quality reservoirs in Z2dn4, Z2dn2, and the Longwangmiao Formation and the generation of three sets of high-quality reservoir–caprock assemblages. An inherited giant structural trap with a longterm stable development is always a favorable zone for petroleum accumulation.

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)0.000
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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussian Geology and GeophysicsSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207