Exploration prospects of the whole oil and gas system in the Permian hydrocarbon depressions in the Eastern Junggar Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Multiple types of oil reservoirs, including conventional oil, tight oil, and shale oil, have been discovered from the slope area to the depression area in the Jimusaer Depression, demonstrating the characteristics of conventional–unconventional ordered coexistence and complete oil and gas system accumulation. Methods Source rocks, sedimentary reservoirs, and reservoir formation were examined to explore the rules of oil and gas accumulation in hydrocarbon-rich depressions in the Eastern Junggar. Results High-quality, saline, lacustrine facies source rocks are believed to be developed in the Middle Permian of the Eastern Junggar. The source rocks in the Jinan, Jimusaer, and Shishugou Depressions have large scale and best quality and have reached the mature stage of evolution. The inherited ancient uplifts around the Permian hydrocarbon-rich depression provided long-term material sources, with the development of fan deltas, braided river deltas, and saline lake sediments, forming sandy conglomerates, cloudy sandstones, cloudy mudstones, etc., in an orderly manner and demonstrating the characteristics of grain sequence reservoir formation. Conventional oil and gas, tight oil and gas, and shale oil and gas accumulations, demonstrating a complete type of reservoir formation and complete oil and gas system development pattern, are developed from the edge of the basin to the depression area. Conclusions The depressions in the Eastern Junggar Basin show a whole oil and gas system pattern. Significance Under the guidance of the entire oil and gas system reservoir formation model, the southern slope of the Shishugou Sag and the Lucaogou Formation of the Jinan Sag were selected as important exploration zones for future exploration in the Eastern Junggar.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".