MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389579968 · doi:10.1029/2023ea003084

Mineralogical Characterization From Geophysical Well Logs Using a Machine Learning Approach: Case Study for the Horn River Basin, Canada

2023· article· en· W4389579968 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xiaojun Liu, Zhuoheng Chen, Stephen E. Grasby

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth and Space Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGeothermal gradientBoreholeOil shaleStructural basinReservoir modelingDrillingWell loggingMineralogyPetrologyGeochemistryGeophysicsGeomorphologyPetroleum engineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate estimation of mineral composition is essential for refined reservoir characterization, thermal conductivity and mechanical determinations of sedimentary rocks, but is extremely challenging in shale units due to the mineralogical complexity, low porosity and ultra‐low permeability. Direct mineral measurements derived from laboratory X‐ray diffraction (XRD) analysis on core samples and borehole geochemical logging tool (GLT), and conventional geophysical logs from vertical wells penetrating sediments are widely available in some basins, which enables detailed mineralogical characterization of a well. A hybrid machine learning (ML) architecture that improves model training and validation by combining convolutional neural network (CNN) with XGBoost allows accurate description of the mineralogical compositions across a basin. We applied this ML approach to predict the mineral compositions using conventional well logs from the Horn River Basin, northeast British Columbia, Canada, where extensive drilling for shale‐gas and conventional hydrocarbon resources, complemented by high temperature geothermal energy potential is ideal for case testing. The predicted mineral compositions from the ML approach are consistent with the mineralogical readings from the GLT and are confirmed by the XRD mineral measurements. This allows basin‐wide mineral compositions mapping that reveals spatial trends of major mineral compositions and their relationship with the previously recognized geomechanical and geological features, which have important implications for thermal conductivity modeling, reservoir evaluation and extensive geological studies.

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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth and Space ScienceSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207