Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lab and field corrosion testing was completed on materials commonly used downhole in Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) to evaluate general corrosion rates, and how they vary with well depth, and operating environment to determine a dominating mechanism. Lab testing utilized autoclaves to allow for corrosion rate and characterization measurements under controlled conditions. Field coupon testing consisted of installing corrosion coupons at various elevations in the annulus of a producing SAGD well. Corrosion rate analysis consisted of weight loss and various electrochemical measurement techniques, visual inspections, and x-ray diffraction analysis to determine scale compositions. Materials tested included various carbon steels, alone and in combination, as well as steels with hard facing and galvanized finishes. Field coupons showed corrosion rates decreasing from 0.0178mm/y at the bottom of the well to 0.0145mm/y at higher well elevations. This corresponded to a decrease in iron sulfide scale content from the well bottom upwards. Based on the scales composition, operating conditions, and fluids present, it is likely that the scales were formed through the well-known solid-state reaction between aqueous H2S and the metal. High average corrosion rates of 0.263mm/y were measured in the lab, compared to a low 0.0183mm/y in field studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".