Evaluation of viscoelastic surfactant‐based diverting agent during the chemical treatment of sandstone reservoirs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The challenges of diversion during the stimulations of carbonate formations have been widely studied for decades. It has been shown that viscoelastic surfactants (VES) are among the effective diverting solutions which can be used during the stimulation of carbonate formations. These chemicals benefit from the reaction products between the acid and the calcite to increase the viscosity of the acid, therefore reducing, temporarily, the permeability of the first invaded rock layer, which holds the highest permeability. This temporary blockage steers the remaining acid to the layers with lower permeability that need treatment. This is usually called self‐diverting acidizing treatment. However, the same approach may not necessarily be applied for sandstone formations that are not calcite rich. In such cases, combining acid stages with batches of diverting agents is still feasible. For this approach, VES is also a suitable, non‐damaging solution that is often overlooked. In this study, the application of VES as a diverting agent was investigated during the chemical treatment operations in sandstone formations. Several dual core‐flooding experiments were performed at high pressure and high temperature (HPHT) conditions using sandstone core samples with high permeability contrast.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".