MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224298359 · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127809

Evaluation of slim-hole NMR logging for hydrogeologic insights into dolostone and sandstone aquifers

2022· article· en· W4224298359 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Peeter Pehme, H Crow, Beth L. Parker, H A J Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaUniversity of Guelph
FundersOffice of Energy Research and DevelopmentCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsGeologyHydrogeologyBoreholeLithologyWell loggingDolostoneAquiferPorosityPetrophysicsBedrockMineralogyGeomorphologySedimentary rockPetrologyGeophysicsGeotechnical engineeringGroundwaterCarbonate rockGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study assesses the performance and limitations of slim-hole borehole nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) technology from a hydrogeologic perspective in fractured, porous rock. NMR logging was carried out in dolomitic and sandstone bedrock boreholes at two research test sites in Ontario, Canada, where aquifer and aquitard units provide a range of clay contents as well as a variety of primary and secondary porosity types (e.g. discrete fractures, reefal structures, vugs and karstic conduits). Results were compared to core measurements, geophysical logs, and hydrogeophysical testing. The vertical response curve of the instrument tested was found to produce 60% of the signal from within a 0.2m span surrounding the measuring point. The repeatability of the total porosity measurements in stationary mode is excellent where the porosity is greater than 0.15. Below that threshold, repeatability is scattered at ±0.05 porosity about the mean, with the variability primarily within the clay- and capillary-bound fractions. The NMR porosity estimates agreed with core measurements to within ±0.04 porosity in both the dolostone and sandstone, but the correlation deteriorates in finely bedded lithologies, and where fracturing is present. Much of the discrepancy is attributed to scaling in a finely layered geologic sequence, as the core samples are much smaller than the entire volume measured with NMR probes. Data collection with the probe in motion (continuous logging) added variability to the response when compared to stationary recordings. Although broadscale trends were comparable, the details and depth-specific insights of the bound fluid fractions varied with logging rates. Overall, NMR provides a robust measurement of the bulk matrix porosity and pore size distribution of lithologies intersected, both of which are critically important parameters in understanding hydrogeologic conditions and contaminant distributions in layered sedimentary rock systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrologySame topicNMR spectroscopy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207