MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387350862 · doi:10.4095/331902

Porosity and permeability variations in the Silurian Lockport Group and A-1 carbonate unit, southwestern Ontario

2023· report· en· W4387350862 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shuo Sun, F R Brunton, T R Carter, John R. Clarke, H A J Russell, K Yeung, A Cachunjua, J Jin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyDolostoneCarbonateDolomiteDrillingEvaporitePermeability (electromagnetism)Drill cuttingsPaleontologyMining engineeringGeochemistryCarbonate rockSedimentary rockDrilling fluidEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the first regional porosity/permeability study to incorporate petroleum industry laboratory core analyses submitted to the Ontario government and managed by Ontario's Oil Gas and Salt Resources Library. This study comprises 11,759 analyses for the Early Silurian Lockport Group of southwestern Ontario from 150 drill cores. The Lockport Group consists of a cyclic succession of dolostones and minor limestones comprising, in ascending order: Gasport, Goat Island, Eramosa, and Guelph formations. This stacked carbonate succession was deposited on an eastward-deepening carbonate ramp, extending from Michigan, through southwestern Ontario, to Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York. It is overlain disconformably by restricted marine carbonates, evaporites and mixed shales of the Salina Group, whereas unconformably underlain by one of four formations that include, the Lions Head (a stratigraphic equivalent of part of the Rochester), DeCew, Rochester and Irondequoit. To ensure appropriate stratigraphic assignment of the laboratory test intervals, a quality assurance/quality control review on formational tops was carried out on the 150 cores that were tested. This regional subsurface work resulted in the reassignment of 846 formation tops that were verified by examination of drill core, drill cuttings, and geophysical well data including gamma-ray, neutron and density logs. Core analysis datasets have been validated by summarizing laboratory protocols and standards and reconciling data fields in the core analysis database with auxiliary data, including geophysical logs, thin sections, and core examinaion. This auxiliary data was then used to identify data outliers to update the core analysis database. The measurements of porosity and permeability were then assigned a formation rank plotted on a subregional scale. Average porosity and permeability values have been divided into statistical populations for each formation assigned by three depositional realms. The southwestern Ontario study area has been divided into three paleogeographic settings, based on distinctive lithofacies that correspond to different carbonate depositional regimes and regions of paleokarstification. From northwest to southeast, the lithofacies reflect an inner to outer carbonate ramp setting designated as area 1-3 from northwest to southeast. Area 1 is the inter-pinnacle karst region and includes some of thepinnacle structures within the Lockport Group. This region has the most significant paleokarstification of the upper Lockport Group (Guelph and Goat Island formations) and overlying Salina Group A-unit. Area 2 has rare pinnacle structures, where no porosity/permeability core analyses data are available. Area 3 is the middle to outer portion of the Lockport carbonate ramp, with local development of reef mound phases in the lower Goat Island and Gasport formations. The porosity and permeability variability corresponds with areal distribution of paleokarstification and resulting diagenetic phases in Area 1, and lithofacies variations and temporal/spatial history of karstification in Area 3. Higher porosity and permeability generally coincide with greater thicknesses of the oil and gas reservoir within pinnacles in Area 1 and reef mound phases of Lockport Group and lower Salina Group A-1 Carbonate in Area 3. Within inter-pinnacle karst regions in Area 1, average porosity for each formation is consistently high with little variations. In Area 3, a general increase of porosity and permeability towards the southeast corresponds with lithofacies ranging from restricted lagoonal/platform interior deposits to carbonate bank deposits with local development of reef mound phases in the Gasport and Goat Island formations. There has been significant erosion and karstification within and at the tops of these pinnacles, resulting in higher porosity and permeability of the Guelph and upper Goat Island formations, and the overlying Salina Group A-1 unit. Paleokarstic events have enhanced various porosity types, including intercrystalline, moldic, irregular and fenestral vugs, and cavities.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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 topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis→French-language works237,207→