MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409791017 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-341

Research on the construction of a working fluid system model for ultra-high temperature dense pressurized leakage prevention and plugging combined with multivariate nonlinear regression and machine learning optimization

2025· article· en· W4409791017 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire Detection and Safety Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeakage (economics)Multivariate statisticsNonlinear systemNonlinear regressionComputer scienceMaterials scienceRegression analysisMachine learningPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At present, drilling luid leakage in oil and gas drilling engineering in complex formations is a worldwide technical problem.The study explains the mechanism of dense pressure-bearing plugging at the bottom of the fracture, explores the in luencing factors of the pressure-bearing capacity of the leakage prevention and plugging working luid, and establishes a mathematical model by using multivariate nonlinear regression analysis.Based on the machine learning technology, the support vector machine algorithm is selected as the prediction method of the particle size of the working luid for leakage prevention and plugging, and the system model of the ultra-high-temperature dense pressurized leakage prevention and plugging working luid is constructed.It is found that the established multivariate nonlinear regression analysis has good it and accuracy, and the average relative error is only 2.9%, and the seam width (-0.694) and formation pressure (0.502) have the greatest in luence on the pressure-bearing capacity of the working luid for leakage prevention and plugging.The prediction accuracy of the support vector machine model for the working luid particle size was 95.36%, and the prediction F1 values on multiple datasets were all greater than 0.9, showing excellent prediction results.The constructed mathematical model can be used to guide the ield operation, which is conducive to the long-term stable plugging and scienti ic leakage prevention of issure-based leakage.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicFire Detection and Safety SystemsFrench-language works237,207