MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394892395 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4258866/v1

Active ions’ impact in the enhanced oil recovery process: a microfluidic-based approach

2024· preprint· en· W4394892395 on OpenAlexaff
Yajun Zhang, Menghao Chai, Yumeng Xie, Kunming Liang, Yiqiang Fan

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsHusky Injection Molding Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrineMicrofluidicsEnhanced oil recoveryReagentPolydimethylsiloxaneMaterials scienceIonChemical engineeringPorosityPorous mediumWater floodingFlooding (psychology)Petroleum engineeringNanotechnologyChemistryComposite materialGeologyOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract More than 50% of the crude oil is trapped inside the pores of the rock after the primary and the secondary oil recovery stage, various methods have been currently used for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) to recover the trapped oil. Brine injection, as the most commonly used approach in EOR, was heavily influenced by the concentration of active ions like Ca2+, Mg2+, and SO42−. In this study, two kinds of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS)-based microfluidic devices were designed and fabricated to mimic the porous structure in order to study the active ion’s impact in the brine flooding process. Since the PDMS is transparent in the visible range, the fluid flow inside the fabricated porous structure can be observed directly during the brine flooding process. The effect of active ions including Ca2+, Mg2+, and SO42− in the brine flooding process was studied in detail with the microfluidic devices. The proposed method could have wide application potential in the screening of flooding reagents in the oil industry.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques→French-language works237,207→