MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389560691 · doi:10.7185/gold2023.20885

Petrophysical properties of representative geological rocks encountered in effective carbon storage and utilization

2023· article· en· W4389560691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shengyu Yang, Tao Zhang, Qinhong Hu, Qiming Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrophysicsGeologyPetroleum engineeringCarbon fibersPetrologyMining engineeringGeotechnical engineeringMaterials sciencePorosityComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under studies for nearly 20 years, several different kinds of subsurface lithologies, such as deep saline aquifers, depleted oil and gas reservoirs, non-minable coal seams, geothermal reservoirs, organic-rich shale, and basalt, can be candidates for permanent CO 2 geological storage processes, in a broad context of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS).These systems commonly need effective reservoirs (sandstones, carbonates) for large-volume storage (e.g., effective porosity) and impermeable cap rock (mudrocks and salt rock) for containment (e.g., permeability, diffusivity).This work studies 10+ representative rock samples from typical geological formations encountered at CCUS, such as Berea sandstone, Crab Orchard sandstone, Guelph dolomite, and Indiana limestone (as depleted sandstone or carbonate oil/gas reservoirs & saline aquifers) with Woodford claystone and Himalayan salt rock as cap rocks.Haynesville Shale, Sihe coal, Texas basalt, and Sierra white granite were also used to study the storage and utilization in shales, coal seams, and basalt formations, as well as enhanced geothermal systems.The important petrophysical attributes (properties of rocks and fluids, as well as fluid-rock interactions) for this wide range of geological rocks are not available or sufficiently studied with respect to different methodologies, vast lithological difference, and sample scale effect, with a particular focus on how microscopic pore structure (especially pore connectivity) influences macroscopic fluid flow and chemical transport [1].In conjuction with a set of complementary approaches for pore structure characterization (such as small angle neutron/X-ray scattering), this work utilizes several custom designed apparatuses (e.g., gas diffusion) to provide the essential information of CO 2 diffusivity and tortuosity of natural rocks, in the presence of other gases (CH 4 , H 2 , and O 2 ), in assessing the effectiveness of CCUS in typical gological formations [2].

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207