MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386744189 · doi:10.1306/12202220005

The impact of organic pores on estimation of overpressure generated by gas generation in organic-rich shale: Example from Devonian Duvernay Shale, Western Canada Sedimentary Basin

2023· article· en· W4386744189 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pengwei Wang, Zhuoheng Chen, Kezhen Hu, Xiao Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyOverpressureOil shaleDevonianSedimentary basinShale gasStructural basinSedimentary rockGeochemistryKerogenBasin modellingPetrologyPetroleum engineeringGeomorphologySource rockPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Overpressure determination is essential for sweet spot identification, resource evaluation as well as drilling in organic-rich shale, a typical self-contained source-reservoir system. Traditional pressure prediction methods designed for conventional source rocks (e.g., the Eaton’s method) were typically established based on mechanical compaction, which did not consider the increase in organic porosity. In this study, a practical approach was introduced to investigate the impact of organic pores on overpressure estimation in organic-rich shale, where overpressure primarily results from gas generation, through introducing organic pores into the expression of sonic transit time and determining overpressure with organic-pore–corrected sonic readings. The proposed organic porosity and overpressure estimation models were applied to the Duvernay Shale of the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin to investigate the impact of organic porosity on prediction of overpressure due to fluid expansion in gas generation windows. A comparison of formation pressure predictions from the application example in the Duvernay Shale demonstrates that the proposed method can significantly improve prediction of the pore fluid pressure in mature source rock. The revised method provides better estimates of overpressure with an improved coefficient of determination of R2 = 0.7. In contrast, without considering the impact from organic pores in the shale, the traditional Eaton’s method overestimates the pressure by up to 42.83% and the correlation between the predicted and the observed results is poor (R2 = 0.15).

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAPG BulletinSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207