MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4253969032 · doi:10.2118/spe-172968-ms

Performance Evaluation of A Horizontal Well with Multiple Fractures Using A Slab Source Function

2015· article· en· W4253969032 on OpenAlexaff
Daoyong Yang, Feng Zhang, John A. Styles, Junmin Gao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlabDiscretizationMechanicsFracture (geology)Bilinear interpolationGeologyConductivityAnisotropyFlow (mathematics)Geotechnical engineeringMathematicsMathematical analysisPhysicsGeophysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A novel slab source function has been formulated and successfully applied to accurately evaluate performance of a horizontal well with multiple fractures in a tight formation. A semi-analytical method is then applied to solve the newly formulated mathematical model by discretizing the fracture into small segments, each of which is treated as a slab source, assuming that there exists unsteady flow between the adjacent segments. The newly developed function has been validated with numerical solution obtained from a reservoir simulator and then extended its application to a field case. The pressure response together with its corresponding derivative type curves has been reproduced to examine effects of number of stages, fracture conductivity, and fracture dimension under various penetration conditions. The fracture conductivity is found to mainly influence early-stage bilinear/linear flow regime, while a smaller conductivity will force more fluid to enter the toe of the fracture than its heel. Penetrating ratio will impose a significant impact on the pressure response at the early stage, forcing the bilinear/linear flow to the radial flow.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis→French-language works237,207→