MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Permeability and Methane Adsorption Capacity through Nanopore Modeling: A Case Study of Shale in the Sichuan Basin

2025· article· en· W4412696558 on OpenAlexaff
Ke Hu, Qian Li, Gao Yihua, Wei Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil shaleMethaneShale gasAdsorptionPermeability (electromagnetism)NanoporePetroleum engineeringStructural basinEnvironmental scienceGeologyHydraulic fracturingChemical engineeringGeochemistryMineralogyChemistryGeomorphologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shale pores are characterized by a wide size distribution, limited throat connectivity, and complex morphology. An accurate and comprehensive quantitative and qualitative description of shale pore structure is a fundamental requirement for evaluating shale reservoir capacity and developing shale gas exploration and development plans. In this paper, shale pores were characterized by the N 2 adsorption/desorption, low-pressure CO 2 adsorption, mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP), focused ion beam-scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM), and three-dimensional reconstruction methods. The results of N 2 adsorption/desorption and CO 2 adsorption indicate that the micropores (<2 nm in diameter) are extremely developed and play a dominant role in the specific surface area of shale, while the mesopores (2–50 nm) and macropores (>50 nm) contribute more to the pore volume of shale. The FIB-SEM and three-dimensional reconstruction visualizes that most mesopores and macropores are detected in organic matter but are poorly interconnected. Nanopore modeling of supercritical CH 4 adsorption results indicates that micropores and fine mesopores play a dominant role in the adsorption capacity of shale. Permeability simulations at the nanoscale further clarify that increased tortuosity significantly reduces permeability. This study provides insights to deeply understand gas adsorption and permeability from the nanoscale perspective.

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)0.000
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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207