MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406787776 · doi:10.1016/j.geoen.2025.213710

Analysis of downhole temperature-strain response in hydraulic fracturing – A coupled geomechanics-thermal-flow simulation approach

2025· article· en· W4406787776 on OpenAlexafffund
Chuanyao Zhong, Jiahui Chen, Juliana Y. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoenergy Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeomechanicsHydraulic fracturingGeologyGeotechnical engineeringStrain (injury)ThermalFlow (mathematics)Petroleum engineeringMechanicsThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fiber optic technologies are important real-time fracture diagnostics and monitoring tools. Simulating field temperature and strain responses using a coupled geomechanical-thermal-flow simulation approach remains challenging, even with the use of commercial software packages . This study presents a novel comprehensive modelling strategy for constructing coupled flow-geomechanical-thermal simulations to analyze fracturing processes in subsurface flow applications. This paper is the first study that meticulously examines different model set-up options, illustrating how commercial packages can be utilized in this context. A 3D deformable finite-element geomechanics system and dual-porosity-dual-permeability flow and thermal simulations are conducted. A dynamic node-splitting technique facilitates the modelling of hydraulic fracture (HF) opening and propagation. The model responses—including fracture geometry , injection pressure , and temperature—are thoroughly validated against several analytical solutions. Geomechanical responses such as displacement, strain, and strain rate are validated against a well-established numerical solution. Our model responses of strain-rate characteristics are compared to field Low-Frequency Distributed Acoustic Sensing (LF-DAS) data. A qualitative analysis has been conducted to explain the possible mechanisms behind the commonly observed optical phase-shifting phenomena in LF-DAS plots. Given that fluid injection and fracturing are commonly encountered in a wide range of geo-energy applications, the work presented in this study offers valuable insights into analyzing these processes and designing fiber-optic monitoring tools.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoenergy Science and EngineeringSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207