MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220981096 · doi:10.53469/ijpee.2022.04(03).06

Using Linear Flow Parameter Initial Rate Method to Optimize Completion Design of Western Canada’s Montney Tight Gas Reservoir

2022· article· en· W4220981096 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rui Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Power and Energy Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringCompletion (oil and gas wells)Tight gasCasingGeologyFlow (mathematics)Reservoir engineeringHydraulic fracturingMathematicsPetroleumGeometryPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2007, the horizontal well staged fracturing technology has been widely used in the development of tight sandstones in the Deep Basin Montney reservoir of Western Canada Basin. The horizontal length of the horizontal well, the amount of proppant added to the fracturing and completion, the frac stage spacing, and the choice of open-hole completion or casing completion have become important factors in the optimization of completion design. LFPIR (Linear Flow Parameter Initial Rate) is observed through the double logarithmic curve of the natural gas production data of the well. After the development enters the stable linear flow stage, the linear flow corresponding to the ideal situation can be obtained when the initial production rate in this stage is inversely extended to tD≈0. The LFPIR depends on the stimulated volume of the reservoir after fracturing, and the completion effect directly affects the size of the stimulated reservoir. The completion quality of the well can be judged by studying the LFPIR of the developed Montney horizon well in the Heritage area. By comparing the LFPIR of wells with different completion designs, optimize the completion design in the tight gas reservoirs.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Power and Energy Engineering→Same topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis→French-language works237,207→