MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255568989 · doi:10.1190/1.9781560802235.ch6

6. Seismic Rock Physics of Steam Injection in Bituminous-Oil Reservoirs

2010· book-chapter· en· W4255568989 on OpenAlex
Evan Bianco, Sam T. Kaplan, Douglas R. Schmitt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociety of Exploration Geophysicists eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceGeophysicsEngineeringGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction This case study explores rock physical properties of heavy-oil reservoirs subject to the steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) thermal-enhanced recovery process (Butler and Stephens, 1981; Butler, 1998). Previously published measurements (e.g., Wang et al., 1990; Eastwood, 1993) of the temperature-dependent properties of heavy-oil saturated sands are extended by fluid substitutional modeling and wireline data to assess the effects of pore fluid composition, pressure, and temperature changes on the seismic velocities of unconsolidated sands. Rock physics modeling is applied to a typical shallow McMurray formation reservoir (135–160 m depth) encountered within the bituminous Athabasca Oil Sands deposit in Western Canada to construct a rock-physics-based velocity model of the SAGD process. Although the injected steam pressure and temperature control the fluid bulk moduli within the pore space, the effective stress-dependent elastic frame moduli are the most poorly known yet most important factors governing the changes of seismic properties during this recovery operation. The results of the fluid substitution are used to construct a 2D synthetic seismic section to establish seismic attributes for analysis and interpretation of the physical SAGD process. The findings of this modeling promote a more complete description of 11 high-resolution, time-lapse, 2D seismic profiles collected over some of the earliest steam zones. The SAGD process has been adopted as the recovery method of choice for producing bitumen from the Athabasca Oil Sands in Western Canada and it has changed relatively little since the first test installation and experiment at the underground test facility in the early 1990s. The invention of Geophysics Research, Department of Physics, this thermal-enhanced oil recovery and horizontal drilling technology was born out of the challenges associated with producing extremely dense and viscous oil [American Petroleum Institute (API) density <10°] from shallow siliciclastic reservoirs. Steam carries a significant portion of its energy as latent heat, and it is much more efficient at transferring heat to the reservoir than merely circulating hot water. Engineering models of this thermal process assume that steam chamber growth is symmetric about the well pairs, but because of lithologic hetereogeneities and steam baffles, this is most certainly not the case (Figure 1). Before seismic profiling can be optimized as a tool for tracking the movement of steam in the reservoir, it is important to understand the behavior of oil-sands material when subjected to elevated temperatures, pore pressure, and fluid saturation conditions inflicted by SAGD.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.194 · 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