A Novel Workflow for Early Time Transient Pressure Data Interpretation in Tight Oil Reservoirs with Physical Constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, a novel workflow has been proposed, validated and applied to interpret the early time transient pressure data in tight oil reservoirs with physical constraints. More specifically, the theoretical model was developed to obtain the transient pressure response for a vertical well in tight oil reservoirs with consideration of pseudo threshold pressure gradient (TPG). Then, a physical constraint between the skin factor and formation permeability has been proposed based on the physical meaning of percolation theory. This physical constraint can be applied to determine the lower limit of the skin factor which can reduce the uncertainty during the interpretation process. It is found that the influence range of the skin factor and permeability may partially overlap during the interpretation process without consideration of physical constraints. Additionally, it is found that the equivalent wellbore radius is more reasonable by considering the skin factor constraints. Furthermore, the short-time asymptotic method was applied to separate the small pressure signal at the early time period and a novel type curve was proposed to better analyze the early time pressure response. Subsequently, sensitivity analyses were conducted to investigate the influence of different parameters on the new type curves. It is found that the new type curves are more dispersed and sensitive to the parameters at the early time period which can be beneficial for the early time transient pressure analysis in a tight formation. The proposed method has been validated and then extended to a field application, demonstrating that the transient pressure for a vertical well in a tight formation can be analyzed in a reasonable and accurate manner with only early time transient pressure data.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".