MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289339392 · doi:10.1190/int-2022-0004.1

Particle size distribution analysis of mudstone based on digital image processing

2022· article· en· W4289339392 on OpenAlex
Ke Liang, Bo Ran, Shugen Liu, Tong Sun, Yiqing Zhu

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInterpretation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSiltKurtosisMineralogyGeologyParticle-size distributionRange (aeronautics)Particle sizePorosityParticle (ecology)Geotechnical engineeringGeomorphologyMaterials scienceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mudstone is becoming increasingly important for unconventional oil and gas development. The morphological characteristics of clastic are not only contributions to the 3D framework of mudstone, but they can clearly affect the physical properties of a mudstone reservoir, including surface area, pore-size distribution, and porosity. However, it is very difficult and time-consuming to measure the particle size distribution (PSD) of mudstone because of its small particle size and strong cementation. However, because of the importance of oil and gas extraction, it is urgent to develop a fast, accurate, and objective analysis method to measure the PSD of mudstone. Based on a comparison of various PSD measurement methods commonly used in the energy industry and geology, the best PSD measurement method for mudstone should be digital image processing. Two imaging methods, trainable Weka segmentation (TWS) and black mudstone particle size measurement, were used to analyze sections of the early Silurian Longmaxi mudstone of China’s Sichuan Basin. The PSD data obtained by manual measurement, TWS, and the contribution method are compared. Image analysis finds that the particle sizes of all samples fall in the range of coarse silt to clay, and the average sizes fall in the range of coarse silt to fine silt. The skewness, kurtosis, standard deviation, and other distribution characteristics parameters find minor errors, and the relative error is less than 15%. The Pearson correlation coefficient of the 10th quantile of TWS, black mudstone particle size measure, and manual measurement were calculated, which found R2 values typically ranging between 0.64 and 0.87. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test results find that the data obtained by the three measurement methods are from the same distribution at the level of 0.05. Analytic results find that the method presented is effective, cost-efficient, and could avoid artificial errors.

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 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 score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.221 · 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