MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4327860548 · doi:10.2118/212422-ms

Improved Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Prediction for Vaca Muerta Shale

2023· article· en· W4327860548 on OpenAlexaff
Rahimah Abd Karim, Roberto Aguilera, Camila Fraga, Laura Estela Toledo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDolomiteTotal organic carbonSedimentary depositional environmentGeologyCalciteOil shaleMineralogySiliciclasticCarbonateAnkeritePetrophysicsClay mineralsPorositySideriteEnvironmental chemistryChemistryGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract TOC evaluation in Vaca Muerta is challenging due to its complex mineralogy and depositional settings. Laboratory measurements can be affected by sample preparation, especially for wells drilled with oil-based mud. Empirical methods like Passey ∆log R relies on resistivity as one of the inputs, which can be affected by clay and mineralogy in shale. In this study, an improved TOC prediction using a multiple regression equation is proposed. The findings reflect the vertical variability of TOC. The method developed in this study first evaluates the TOC correlation with available electrical logs from a vertical well that includes spectral gamma ray, neutron porosity, density and resistivity. It also assesses the correlation with clay and inorganic mineralogy available from X-ray diffraction. This study also incorporates for the first time, thin bed heterogeneity that comprises calcite beef, ash beds and nodules. They make up a considerable portion of the facies, especially in the organic-rich unit of Lower Vaca Muerta (LVM). Despite the complexity, the modelled TOC calibrate well with the laboratory-measured TOC. The TOC regression equation is developed based on two key findings. First, the TOC is positively correlated with uranium and resistivity; and negatively correlated with dolomite and calcite. High TOC is observed in low Ca (calcite, dolomite and ankerite) and high QFP (quartz, k-feldspar and plagioclase) intervals, and vice versa. This negative correlation is unique to Vaca Muerta, which is attributed to the mixed carbonate-siliciclastic depositional system (Kietzmann et al., 2014). Second, the TOC is also strongly affected by thin bed heterogeneity that is identified through micro-resistivity image log and high-resolution logs. Their effect is more pronounced on resistivity log; therefore, an adjustment factor is applied to the regression to account for their presences. Results show that the modelled TOC match well the core TOC as compared to Passey ∆log R method. An important observation is that the Passey ∆log R technique would overestimate the TOC at the top of Upper Vaca Muerta due to high and resistive Ca content; and underestimate it in LVM due to conductive clay in the argillaceous ash beds. Consequently, it would mislead the estimation of reservoir thickness, identification of sweet spot for landing zones, as well as resource estimation in Vaca Muerta shale. This paper develops an original regression equation that models TOC in the presence of thin bed heterogeneity in Vaca Muerta. The results compare well with the laboratory-measured TOC. The study reveals the vertical variability of TOC across the five stratigraphic units in a vertical well. More importantly, it highlights potential TOC discrepancy by Passey ∆log R technique that could mislead reservoir thickness estimation due to the effects of mineralogy and thin bed heterogeneity on resistivity.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis→French-language works237,207→