MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246958831 · doi:10.2523/84480-ms

Separating the Signals from Clay Bound Water and Heavy Oil in NMR Spectra of Unconsolidated Samples

2003· article· en· W4246958831 on OpenAlexaff
F. Manalo, M. Ding, J. Bryan, A. Kantzas

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsNMR spectra databaseMontmorilloniteBound waterSpectral lineKaoliniteRelaxation (psychology)AsphaltWater contentClay mineralsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryMineralogyMaterials scienceGeologyEnvironmental chemistryGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), whether implemented in a logging tool, bench top analyser or on-line sensor, cannot detect the complete response of heavy oil or bitumen. Both heavy oil and bitumen relax quickly so the spectra from these samples at room temperature appear mostly at relaxation times less than 10 ms. The contribution of heavy oil to the NMR spectrum is distinct in samples that are free of clays or contain bulk water and it is consequently possible to calculate oil and water content based on NMR spectra. Solids content is then determined by difference. However, samples that contain clays and/or relatively little water produce spectra that are more difficult to interpret because the relaxation times of clay bound water are in the same range as bitumen. Experimental results from mixtures containing a layer of illite, kaolinite or montmorillonite in sand exposed to mild brine shows clay bound water to have a characteristic response. These NMR

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPE Annual Technical Conference and ExhibitionSame topicNMR spectroscopy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207