MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205895417 · doi:10.4095/328850

Identification of regional structural corridors in the Montney play using trend surface analysis combined with geophysical imaging, British Columbia and Alberta

2021· report· en· W4205895417 on OpenAlexaffabout
P Wozniakowska, David W. Eaton, C Deblonde, Andrew J. Mort, Omid H. Ardakani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyTectonicsStructural basinStructural geologyPaleontologySeismologyGraben

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (WCSB) is a mature oil and gas basin with an extraordinary endowment of publicly accessible data. It contains structural elements of varying age, expressed as folding, faulting, and fracturing, which provide a record of tectonic activity during basin evolution. Knowledge of the structural architecture of the basin is crucial to understand its tectonic evolution; it also provides essential input for a range of geoscientific studies, including hydrogeology, geomechanics, and seismic risk analysis. This study focuses on an area defined by the subsurface extent of the Triassic Montney Formation, a region of the WCSB straddling the border between Alberta and British Columbia, and covering an area of approximately 130,000 km2. In terms of regional structural elements, this area is roughly bisected by the east-west trending Dawson Creek Graben Complex (DCGC), which initially formed in the Late Carboniferous, and is bordered to the southwest by the Late Cretaceous - Paleocene Rocky Mountain thrust and fold belt (TFB). The structural geology of this region has been extensively studied, but structural elements compiled from previous studies exhibit inconsistencies arising from distinct subregions of investigation in previous studies, differences in the interpreted locations of faults, and inconsistent terminology. Moreover, in cases where faults are mapped based on unpublished proprietary data, many existing interpretations suffer from a lack of reproducibility. In this study, publicly accessible data - formation tops derived from well logs, LITHOPROBE seismic profiles and regional potential-field grids, are used to delineate regional structural elements. Where seismic profiles cross key structural features, these features are generally expressed as multi-stranded or en echelon faults and structurally-linked folds, rather than discrete faults. Furthermore, even in areas of relatively tight well control, individual fault structures cannot be discerned in a robust manner, because the spatial sampling is insufficient to resolve fault strands. We have therefore adopted a structural-corridor approach, where structural corridors are defined as laterally continuous trends, identified using geological trend surface analysis supported by geophysical data, that contain co-genetic faults and folds. Such structural trends have been documented in laboratory models of basement-involved faults and some types of structural corridors have been described as flower structures. The distinction between discrete faults and structural corridors is particularly important for induced seismicity risk analysis, as the hazard posed by a single large structure differs from the hazard presented by a corridor of smaller pre-existing faults. We have implemented a workflow that uses trend surface analysis based on formation tops, with extensive quality control, combined with validation using available geophysical data. Seven formations are considered, from the Late Cretaceous Basal Fish Scale Zone (BFSZ) to the Wabamun Group. This approach helped to resolve the problem of limited spatial extent of available seismic data and provided a broader spatial coverage, enabling the investigation of structural trends throughout the entirety of the Montney play. In total, we identified 34 major structural corridors and number of smaller-scale structures, for which a GIS shapefile is included as a digital supplement to facilitate use of these features in other studies. Our study also outlines two buried regional foreland lobes of the Rocky Mountain TFB, both north and south of the DCGC.

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)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207