Mechanistic study and performance evaluation of steam assisted gravity drainage using direct visualisation of pore-level experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, insights into the pore-scale physics of SAGD process are presented through analysis of a systematic series of SAGD visualisation experiments, conducted using optical imaging technique and glass-etched micromodels of capillary networks. The steam chamber propagation was found to be influenced by the randomly-distributed fingering of the invading steam front near the mobile oil-steam chamber interface. The steam fingering was extensive during the vertical growth of the steam chamber where the steam buoyant front was protruding through the pores containing a continuum of oil. The steam fingering phenomenon was also observed during the outward propagation of the steam chamber near its lateral wings, but to a lesser extent. The rate of pore-scale horizontal interface advancement was constant at each elevation along the height of the micromodels. The average pore-level SAGD sweep rates as well as the net cumulative steam to oil ratio were correlated using an analytical model. [Received: March 15, 2018; Accepted: February 11, 2019]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".