Quantitative characterization of siliceous contents of different origins by use of logging analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We have developed a new and pragmatic technique to quantitatively characterize the silica content of shale of various origins. By comparing the genesis of silica in shale (i.e., biogenic origin, terrigenous origin, and clay transformation), the corresponding silica content per unit volume is determined as a function of the total silica content, each of which is determined from core samples. Subsequently, we have developed a new inverse framework and successfully applied it to quantify different types of silica in the Silurian Longmaxi Formation shale in the Zhaotong area. The biogenic silica content per unit volume is found to be up to 5.61 wt%–5.67 wt%, accounting for 12.8–14.5 times of abiogenic silica, which is approximately 0.39 wt%–0.44 wt%, indicating that biogenic silica contributes more to the total silica than that of abiogenic silica in the bottom of the Longmaxi Formation. Using well-logging data, the biogenic silica content is found to follow the same pattern as the total silica content in the vertical direction. Such an identified pattern together with the silica content leads to more accurate determination of porosity and more appropriate placement of a horizontal well with multistage fractures in a shale gas reservoir.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".