MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387569371 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3336424/v1

Assessment of Wellbore Integrity Failure Risk and Hazardous Zones in Depleted Reservoirs Underground Gas Storage During the Operation Processes

2023· preprint· en· W4387569371 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Wang, Ergün Kuru, Chaojie Zhao, Minggang Liu, Yanxin Jin

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsWellboreHazardous wastePetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Waste managementGeologyEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Depleted reservoirs are widely used for underground gas storage due to their advantages of low construction cost and easy development. Under the influence of complex geological conditions and frequent operations, the integrity of the wells in depleted reservoirs is prone to failure, which would potentially lead to gas leakage. In this study, by using a finite element based computational fluid dynamics model, we have developed evaluation criteria for assessing the severity of the occurred wellbore integrity failure and the risk of the un-occurred wellbore integrity failures respectively to identify hazardous zones potentially prone to wellbore integrity failure. The study results indicate that the gas storage wellbore integrity failure is prone to occur inside the wellbore structure in the direction of the minimum ground stress near the lower boundary of the formation interlayer. The wellbore integrity failure hazardous zones are mainly concentrated at the formation interlayer boundaries. The practical guidelines and solutions derived from current research results can be used for environmental protection work to avoid pollution problems caused by natural gas leakage.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicDrilling and Well Engineering→French-language works237,207→