Analysis of Joints Patterns in Albian to Santonian Strata on the Eastern Flank of the Abakaliki Anticlinorium: Implications on Paleostress Conditions and Fluid Flow Properties in an Unconventional Petroleum System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An analysis of joint patterns were carried out on multiple exposures in Albian to Turonian strata belonging to the Abakaliki Formation (Asu River Group) and the Eze-Aku Formation (Eze-Aku Group) on the eastern flank of the Abakaliki Anticlinorium of the Southern Benue Trough. The analysis was carried out using FracPaQ a MATLAB based toolbox for quantification of fracture patterns. The tool was used to calculate fracture density, and intensity of the traces; to quantify scaling distributions, and to determine dilation tendencies, slip tendencies, and to quantify connectivity, and fluid flow directions. Analysis show the presence of two major joint systems: A Major Cross-Fold Joint (CF-J) system -orthogonal to the regional fold axes- consisting of the CF-J1 set trending NW/SE (315±5°), and a subordinate Longitudinal Joint System (L-J) -subparallel to the fold axes- consisting of a NE-SW L-j1 set, an ENE-WSW (60°±5°) L-j2 set, and an E-W trending L-j3 set. Fracture patterns show intensity and density ranging from 11.2395- 53.3443 m-1 and 85.2747- 629.5928 m-2 respectively. Joints in the NE-SW show high dilation and low slip tendencies given a NW-SE directed maximum principal horizontal stress σH stress field. The units of the Abakaliki Formation show better connectivity and lower permeability anisotropy as both fracture systems are well developed in those units. These joints, having formed in the period leading up to the Santonian inversion would have been ideal conduits for migration and flow of hydrocarbon and mineral fluids. The Cross-Fold System precedes the folding episode in the Santonian period and is likely a result of overpressure conditions due to disequilibrium compaction in the Albian- Turonian strata in an initial compressive regional tectonic stress field. The Longitudinal System formed later and is related to the outer-arc flexure of the folded units taking advantage of the nascent cleavage structures in the folded shale units.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".