MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406691513 · doi:10.1017/9781108686631.016

Models of Reservoir Quality Distribution

2025· book-chapter· en· W4406691513 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsGeoscience BC
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Environmental scienceDistribution (mathematics)Computer scienceGeologyMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter starts with characteristics of matrix- and fracture-controlled reservoirs. Building upon Chapter 7, it focuses on a detailed discussion of depositional environments of strike-slip terrains and transform margins in an attempt to understand their potential for developing reservoirs capable of hosting hydrocarbons. The discussion includes details from several natural laboratories, such as the Vienna Basin in Austria, Czech Republic, and Slovakia, representing the continental strike-slip settings and Equatorial Atlantic and Guyana–Suriname regions representing transform margins. The knowledge from these examples is combined with other case studies from the literature on these two tectonic settings. Although every margin and basin is unique, this chapter tries to explore the commonality within continental strike-slip and transform margin settings. This chapter focuses on their main depositional trends and their role in developing specific characteristic types of reservoirs to form a framework that can be applied to other continental strike-slip terrains and transform margins.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207