MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097222773

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY New Measurement-While-Drilling Surveying Technique Utilizing Sets of Fiber Optic Rotation Sensors

2002· article· en· W7097222773 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysics and Sensor Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccelerometerMagnetometerDirectional drillingGyroscopeRotation (mathematics)Earth's magnetic fieldDrillMeasurement while drillingFluxgate compassMeasure (data warehouse)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Horizontal drilling processes in the oil industry utilize directional measurementwhile-drilling (MWD) instruments to monitor the position and the orientation of the bottom hole assembly (BHA). The present directional monitoring equipment includes three accelerometers and three magnetometers mounted in three mutually orthogonal directions. At some predetermined surveying stations, the accelerometers measure the Earth gravity components to determine the BHA inclination and tool face angles while the magnetometers measure the Earth’s magnetic field to determine the BHA azimuth. The massive amount of ferrous and steel materials around the drilling rig, the presence of downhole ore deposits, the drill string-induced interference and the geomagnetic influences can all have a deleterious impact on the magnetometer measurements. Therefore, this research proposes the use of fiber optic gyroscopes (FOGs) to replace the magnetometers. A quantitative feasibility study has shown that the FOG has excellent immunity to the severe downhole shock and vibration forces. This thesis aims at developing new MWD surveying methodologies based on the

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.011

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.152 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysics and Sensor TechnologyFrench-language works237,207