MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408266406 · doi:10.2118/223989-ms

Overview of the Foster Creek Propane Solvent-Aided Process Pilot

2025· article· en· W4408266406 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lukemon A. Adetunji, Amos Ben‐Zvi, I. Kochhar, M. A. Gorkoff, Niria Goñi Avila

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsCenovus Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropaneProcess (computing)Computer scienceProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringOperating systemChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Solvent co-injection has been investigated for bitumen recovery due to potential benefits such as lower GHG emissions and bitumen upgrading, amongst others. The technology has been piloted and deployed by bitumen producers in Alberta, Canada. Different solvents as well as range of solvent concentrations have been employed, resulting in varying field performance. Optimization of this technology warrants collection of more field data. In this paper, the learnings from a 10 wt.% Propane Solvent-Aided Process Pilot that was executed in a well pair in the Foster Creek Thermal Project, are presented. The pilot design, reservoir surveillance plan, and data collection are discussed. Results from this pilot show that there was at least a 25% reduction in the steam/oil ratio (SOR). Furthermore, existence of an inverse correlation between the propane-in-casing production rate and the reduction in SOR, was observed. Finally, it was shown that the performance of bitumen recovery by propane co-injection with steam, can be predicted by reservoir simulation.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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