MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4221119268 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu22-3271

The non-negligible contribution of shallow injection wells on the triggering of the Mw 5.0 Mentone earthquake via coupled poroelastic stress perturbations

2022· preprint· en· W4221119268 on OpenAlexaff
Xinyu Tan, Semechah K. Y. Lui

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPoromechanicsEpicenterPermeability (electromagnetism)SeismologyStructural basinFault (geology)Injection wellOil shaleFault planePore water pressurePetrologyGeotechnical engineeringGeomorphologyPorosityChemistryPetroleum engineeringPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Occurred in the Delaware Basin, western Texas, near the town of Mentone, the Mw 5.0 Mentone earthquake is one of the largest induced earthquakes in the central US. Within 25 km of the epicenter, there are a few deep injection wells to the northwest injecting in the high permeable limestone layer at about 22 km averagely, as well as a lot of shallow wells injecting in the upper high permeable sandstone layer at around 18 km averagely. Between the shallow sandstone and deep limestone layers is a thick shale layer with low permeability, which excludes the possibility of downward percolation of the injected fluid in the shallow injection layer. However, the cumulative injection volume of shallow injection wells is about five times as much as that of deep injection wells. Motivated by this, we investigate whether the shallow injection wells may play a role in triggering the Mw 5.0 Mentone earthquake through the injection-induced coupled poroelastic stress perturbations. We first perform focal mechanism inversion and earthquake relocation with the Cut and Paste (CAP) and hypoDD methods, respectively, to constrain the fault plane on which the Mw 5.0 event occurred. A south-facing fault plane with strike/dip of 81o/52o is successfully fitted. We then calculate the change of the Coulomb failure stress (ΔCFS) caused by the shallow injection wells at the mainshock location based on the linear fully coupled poroelastic stress model. The calculated ΔCFS of shallow injection wells is approximately 20 kPa and it is mostly contributed by the change in coupled poroelastic stress. Based on findings from other studies, this value of ΔCFS is sufficient in reactivating faults that are well aligned with the local stress field. Since we only account for about half of the total injection volume from the shallow wells in the calculation, we also hypothesize that the actual perturbations caused by shallow injection wells via the coupled poroelastic stress change would be more prominent. Our result reveals the vital role of injection-induced coupled poroelastic stress in triggering seismicity, especially in low permeable geologic settings.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques→French-language works237,207→