MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291754956 · doi:10.1190/image2022-3749919.1

Numerical modeling of low-frequency distributed acoustic sensing signals for mixed-mode fracture activation

2022· article· en· W4291754956 on OpenAlexaff
Chaoyi Wang, David W. Eaton, Yuanyuan Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueSecond International Meeting for Applied Geoscience & Energy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowComputer scienceAcoustic emissionMode (computer interface)Slip (aerodynamics)Discontinuity (linguistics)Shear (geology)AcousticsSeismologyGeologyDatabaseEngineeringPhysicsPetrologyAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the development of distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) technology has enabled direct monitoring of subsurface strain during hydraulic fracturing operations. Most low frequency (<1Hz) DAS signals (LFDAS) exhibit strain or strain-rate patterns that are characteristic of propagating Mode-I (tensile) hydraulic fractures. However, in cases where pre-existing natural fractures or faults exist in proximity to operations, mixed-mode failure is possible, consisting of shear slip (Mode-II) plus dilation. Yet, the characteristics of mixed-mode LFDAS signals are poorly understood. We present a numerical simulation approach based on the Displacement Discontinuity Method to perform forward modeling of the mixed-mode LFDAS signals during the initial reactivation stages for a critically stressed fault. Our novel workflow provides a practical tool to perform fast forward modeling to characterize fault reactivation during hydraulic fracturing operations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSecond International Meeting for Applied Geoscience &amp; EnergySame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207