MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303858668 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24710

Modelling temperature dynamics of the SAGD process in an oil reservoir by the discovery of parametric partial differential equations

2022· article· en· W4303858668 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Kiran Raviprakash, Ajay Ganesh, Biao Huang, Vinay Prasad

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsPartial differential equationPetrophysicsPartial derivativeParametric statisticsVariogramReservoir simulationProcess (computing)Steam-assisted gravity drainageComputer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationPetroleum engineeringMathematicsKrigingEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringMachine learningMathematical analysisPorosityStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many chemical and industrial processes are complex, and the dynamics of such processes cannot be explained using a partial differential equation (PDE) or a system of PDEs with constant coefficients. Parametric PDEs, that is, PDEs with their coefficients varying across time or space, are utilized for this purpose. The non‐availability of data at all spatial locations and partially available process knowledge add to the complexity of modelling such processes. This paper proposes a framework to discover parametric PDEs using data‐driven and hybrid modelling approaches with the temperature dynamics of steam‐assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process in an oil reservoir as the system under study. We utilize an ensemble of 200 realizations of the temperature dynamics generated using the variogram for the PDE discovery. Permeability, which is one of the oil reservoir's petrophysical properties, is used to develop the hybrid models. We infer that utilizing partial process knowledge aids in improving the model's accuracy.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207