MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307045772 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggac416

Modelling of fluid pressure migration in a pressure sensitive fault zone subject to cyclic injection and implications for injection-induced seismicity

2022· article· en· W4307045772 on OpenAlexaff
Yinlin Ji, Wei Zhang, Hannes Hofmann, Yuedu Chen, Christian Kluge, Arno Zang, Günter Zimmermann

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersHelmholtz-Gemeinschaft
KeywordsInduced seismicityGeologyMicroseismAmplitudePore water pressurePermeability (electromagnetism)Geothermal gradientAttenuationFault (geology)PoromechanicsSeismic hazardFluid pressureSeismologyMechanicsGeotechnical engineeringGeophysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Fault zones often serve as the major fluid pathways in a variety of geo-energy systems, such as deep geothermal systems. However, injection-induced instability of faults can sometimes lead to large-magnitude earthquakes. Cyclic injection has thus been proposed as an alternative injection protocol to better manage and mitigate the associated seismic risks. The risks of injection-induced seismicity depend primarily on the extent and magnitude of the fluid pressure perturbation. When fluid is injected into a fault zone, the local fault permeability will be enhanced, which in turn promotes the migration of fluid along the fault. This nonlinear process is further complicated during cyclic injection via alternating the injection pressure. In this study, both numerical and analytical modelling are conducted to investigate cyclic fluid injection into a fault zone with pressure sensitive permeability, in which the local fault permeability changes as a function of the local effective stress. The match with laboratory-scale experimental and field-scale analytical results of cyclic fluid injection verifies the accuracy of the numerical model. The parametric study reveals that the injection pressure attenuation, quantified by the amplitude ratio and phase shift, is enhanced by a lower initial fault permeability, a smaller stress sensitivity coefficient and a shorter period of pressure cycle (i.e. a higher frequency). Besides, the amplitude of the pressure cycle has a negligible effect on the injection pressure attenuation. We also discuss the implications of our results for the less amenable far-field seismic hazard and post shut-in seismicity.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207