MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Micromechanical characterisation of overburden shales in the Horn River Basin through nanoindentation

2023· article· en· W4315482680 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T.S. Charlton, Mohamed Rouainia, Andrew C. Aplin, Q.J. Fisher, Leon Bowen

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsBedGeologyNanoindentationOil shalePorosimetryAnisotropyPetrophysicsMineralogyLithologyHydraulic fracturingMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringPorosityComposite materialPetrologyPorous medium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The paper presents a micromechanical characterisation of Fort Simpson shale, which overlies unconventional gas-producing lithologies in the Horn River Basin, NW Canada. The Fort Simpson formation is clay-rich and microseismic data recorded during hydraulic fracturing events in the underlying reservoir has shown the formation acts as a barrier to fracture development, with a notably anisotropic seismic response. Samples were prepared from core fragments and the composition and texture of the shale was characterised using X-ray diffraction, mercury injection porosimetry and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Nanoindentation testing was used to obtain the mechanical response of the shale microstructure, at grain-scale. The indentation was conducted on a grid pattern and samples were oriented both parallel and perpendicular to the bedding plane to assess the inherent mechanical anisotropy. Chemical analysis of the grids was also undertaken through SEM/EDS (energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy) and the coupled chemo-mechanical data was used to characterise the material phases of the shale through a statistical clustering procedure. The results show that Fort Simpson shale broadly consists of a soft clay phase, with strongly anisotropic elastic stiffness, and stiffer but effectively isotropic grains of quartz and feldspar. A simple upscaling scheme was also applied to link the grain-scale elastic stiffness to the field-scale microseismic 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental ScienceSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207