Investigation on Two M<sub>w</sub> 3.6 and M<sub>w</sub> 4.1 Earthquakes Triggered by Poroelastic Effects of Hydraulic Fracturing Operations Near Crooked Lake, Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A coupled approach of fluid flow and geomechanics is proposed in this study to quantitatively understand the hydraulic fracturing‐induced poroelastic effects that activate pre‐existing faults and trigger earthquake swarms near Crooked Lake, Alberta. The 3D poroelastic simulation of the seismogenic fault zone is then conducted to characterize the pressure diffusion and stress perturbation that led to fault activation. Results show that the poroelastic effects on the high‐permeable damage zones of a conductive‐barrier fault triggered the sequential activation of the seismogenic fault in the basement and Winterburn Formation. In addition, the high‐permeable damage zones act as conduits for pore pressure diffusion along the fault, whereas the fault core functions as a barrier to prevent crossing flow. The poroelastic effects in terms of pressure diffusion and stress perturbation in response to fluid injection facilitated the fault slip and hence triggered the M w 3.6 earthquake in the basement formation 40 days after the fracturing operations. Moreover, the mainshock created negative Coulomb failure stress changes, inhibiting further fault slip in the basement formation. Subsequently, the stimulation of another well facilitated poroelastic effects on the fault damage zone in top Winterburn Formation, reactivating the same fault with an M w 4.1 earthquake 8 days after the initiation of treatments. It is essential to optimize the injection site selection near the existing faults to reduce risks of the induced earthquakes near Crooked Lake.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".