Pressure-stress evaluation of Angore C1 and C2 wells, Western Fold Belt, PNG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Previously, Karner et al. (2023) detailed drilling observations from ExxonMobil-operated gas development wells drilled from 2012 to 2015 at the onshore Angore gas field, Papua New Guinea (PNG), as part of the PNG LNG drilling program. They highlighted spatial variations of the pressure and stress profiles across Angore when compared to the single 1990 exploration well. This paper focusses, instead, on pressure-stress and geomechanical interpretations of two additional PNG LNG development wells drilled at Angore between 2022-2024, with surface locations and well paths very close to the 1990 exploration well. The recent wells (Angore C1 and C2) encountered challenging drilling conditions with multiple stuck pipe events and borehole enlargement, with stress estimates that exceed magnitudes seen at the Angore 1A exploration well. Furthermore, the Angore C-pad data highlights an interval in which minimum stress significantly exceeds density-derived overburden, which is dramatically different to the earlier exploration well. The results show that: 1) stress magnitude has evolved in the span of 34 years; 2) formation pressure and stress regime varies with depth and lithology; 3) mechanical properties and structural geometry allow for a non-Andersonian stress state (minimum stress exceeded overburden).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".