On the One-Point Model for the Productivity Evaluation in Jingbian Sector of Yan’an Gas Field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The productivity equation of a gas well is, in the final analysis, an expression that describes the relationship between the production of a gas well and its bottom-hole flowing pressure. There are two kinds of productivity equations in common use at present: binomial productivity equation and exponential productivity equation. Combined with the modified isochronal well test, the test data are interpreted, and it is found that the open flow rates calculated by the two productivity equations are basically the same when the pressure difference at the test point is large, and the deviation of the exponential productivity equation is large when the pressure difference at the test point is small. Using binomial productivity equation and modifying isochronous well test, we established the single-point deliverability formula for the Jingbian sector of the Yan’an gas field. The field experience formula and production data are used to verify it. Their average errors are 2.59% and 7.12%, respectively; and the coincidence rate of productivity evaluation is 90%. The one-point productivity formula established has high precision and is suitable for productivity analysis of gas wells in paleozoic reservoirs in the Jingbian sector of the Yan’an gas field. This paper provides insights into the one-point productivity evaluation and its future application in the gas field.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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".