The Impact of Bedding Plane on Geotechnical Properties and Fractures Geometry of Montney Equivalent Outcrop Rocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydraulic fracturing (HF) or fracking is extensively used to increase the permeability of unconventional source rocks, such as the Montney Formation which is a prolific producer of oil and gas in Western Canada. Optimizing the economic recovery of hydrocarbons in these reservoirs is dependent on understanding how the rocks fail. During HF, it is generally assumed that vertical fractures in the rock occur, since fracture propagate perpendicular to direction of minimum stress, which in the subsurface is typically in the horizontal direction. However, recent studies have shown that horizontal fractures are also formed as a part of the hydraulic fracture network (HFN), which is assumed to be related to weak bedding planes. To investigate the potential influence of weak bedding planes, a series of Brazilian tests were conducted on Montney equivalent outcrop rock samples. In these tests axial load is applied at different orientations to the bedding plane of the rock samples to evaluate the influence of bedding plane orientation on fracture behaviour, including Brazilian tensile strength, elastic properties and fracture propagation in micro and macro scale. The results of this study can lead to better understanding of the fracture behaviour of Montney siltstone and may help better predict HF fracture propagation and enhance hydrocarbon recovery.
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) | 0.002 | 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".