MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7067257561

Malaysian Sand for Proppant

2013· other· en· W7067257561 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUTPedia (Universiti Teknologi Petronas) · 2013
Typeother
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic fracturingClosure (psychology)Quality (philosophy)Completion (oil and gas wells)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rise in hydraulic fracturing applications over the past decade, the market availability of proppants plays a more significant role in the global oilfield economy. As a result, the demand for commercially manufactured proppants is increasing, fueling the construction of new production facilities around the world. Currently, there are only a few numbers of well-known suppliers of manufactured proppants that dominate the business globally. This project aims to study the properties and characteristics of Malaysia local sand for possible use as proppant specifically local sand resourced from Sarawak area. Quality silica sand from certain areas of the Sarawak state was identified in order to collect the sample. This project includes the study on the recent development of proppant characteristics of local sand as compared to the commercial sand as the Ottawa and Brady sand. It is mostly known characteristic of proppant is its conductivity. Generally, the properties of the proppant which affect its conductivity are mainly roundness, size distribution, resistance to crush under the influence of closure stress, grain-size distribution and proppant density. These properties will be tested in the laboratory in compliance with the International Standard Organization (ISO 13503-2 and ISO 13505-5) for commercial proppant. The results obtained from the analyses will be compared to the existing sand based proppant in the market.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.007

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.235 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUTPedia (Universiti Teknologi Petronas)Same topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207