Investigating the controls on production from a basin-centered gas accumulation: lower cretaceous cadotte member, Deep Basin Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines the controls on gas production from a Cretaceous sandstone deposit located within the Deep Basin of Alberta, Canada. By integrating core, wireline log, 3-D seismic, petrophysical, pressure and production data, we show that the best production comes from permeable chert-rich shoreface and beachface sandstones separated laterally and cyclically by tighter quartzose sandstones. The physical properties of the two lithologies are sufficiently different that they can be distinguished seismically; a map of seismic amplitudes for the Cadotte shows curvilinear high-amplitude anomalies (corresponding to cherty lithologies) that are parallel to depositional strike and correlate precisely with production trends. Like other Cretaceous units in this area, the Cadotte has water situated structurally up dip from gas with the contact between these two phases traversing through our study area. Previous interpretations of the contact's placement have attributed it to relative permeability, structural and to a lesser extent stratigraphic influences on the strata. This work suggests that the location of the contact is controlled by the interplay of regional structure and depositional processes that dictate the texture (and associated capillary pressures), mineralogy and stratigraphic architecture of the rocks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".