MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407262209 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25630

Supercritical water injection into unconventional reservoirs: A comprehensive flow model of an injection well connected to a reservoir

2025· article· en· W4407262209 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roman Yusupov, Aman Turakhanov, Elena Mukhina, Alexander Cheremisin, Konstantin Prochukhan, Аlexey Cheremisin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation
KeywordsWellheadPetroleum engineeringSupercritical fluidEnhanced oil recoveryThermalSteam injectionWater injection (oil production)Flow (mathematics)Thermal conductivityMaterials scienceInjection wellMechanicsEnvironmental scienceGeologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Supercritical water injection (SCW) is a promising thermal method for enhancing oil recovery from hard‐to‐recover reservoirs. The success of this technique relies heavily on the downhole properties of the injected fluid, particularly under high‐pressure, high‐temperature conditions. In this study, a model of SCW flow through thermally insulated injection tubing, comprising both vertical and horizontal sections, is developed. An engineering code was created to simulate SCW injection, incorporating a simplified reservoir model in the horizontal section as a boundary condition, with reservoir injectivity determined iteratively based on wellhead pressure. Numerical examples illustrate the model's performance by examining the effects of varying injection system parameters. High‐precision correlations were employed to calculate fluid thermodynamic properties, enabling accurate simulations. Key factors such as initial SCW temperature, insulation thermal conductivity, and skin factor were analyzed to assess their impact on pressure, temperature, and specific enthalpy distributions along the tubing. The findings provide insights into optimizing SCW injection parameters, underscoring the potential of this approach for effective thermal recovery in unconventional reservoirs.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering→Same topicPetroleum Processing and Analysis→French-language works237,207→