MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959639340 · doi:10.11575/prism/26879

MEMS-based Downhole Inertial Navigation Systems for Directional Drilling Applications

2015· other· en· W6959639340 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMeasurement while drillingDirectional drillingDrillInertial navigation systemAzimuthDrill pipeDrillingTelemetryTrenchless technology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional methods in horizontal drilling processes incorporate magnetic surveying techniques for determining the position and the attitude of the bottomhole assembly. Magnetic surveying results in higher costs and relatively large surveying errors. Micro-Electromechanical Systems (MEMS)-based inertial navigation has been proposed as an alternative to magnetometer-based downhole surveying due to its light weight, small size and low power consumption. The present study explores the feasibility of utilizing MEMS-based inertial measurement unit as a surveying sensor, in conjunction with a Rotary In-Drilling Alignment (R-IDA) method for measurement-while-drilling (MWD) processes. A novel, downhole-mountable, autonomous and cost-effective apparatus to practically implement R-IDA has been proposed and its capabilities to reduce the azimuth error have been assessed. Furthermore, this study discusses the concept of wireless data transmission within drill pipes downhole. It is shown that wireless telemetry inside the drill pipe is potentially capable of transmitting at a relatively high rate with low power consumption.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)French-language works237,207