MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W835582478 · doi:10.1504/ijogct.2015.070059

An up-scaling approach for vapour extraction process in heavy oil reservoirs

2015· article· en· W835582478 on OpenAlexaff
Tayebeh Jamshidi, Fanhua Zeng, Mehdi Mohammadpoor, Zeinab Movahedzadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Oil Gas and Coal Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCementation (geology)Permeability (electromagnetism)Thermal diffusivityPorosityScalingOil viscosityOil fieldViscosityPetroleum engineeringMaterials scienceDiffusionMechanicsPhysical propertyGeotechnical engineeringThermodynamicsGeologyMathematicsChemistryPhysicsCementComposite materialGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although some studies are performed and a series of analytical models are developed, it has been found that current analytical models are not accurately predicting the production rate by VAPEX. This is largely because the diffusion used in the current model is based on a single fluid property (oil viscosity only) while other properties such as permeability, porosity and cementation factor carry large amount of uncertainties. The main objective of this study was to use the experimental data obtained from two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) physical models and develop a new and more accurate correlation for diffusivity that takes into account fluid and reservoir properties based on Butler's equation. In order to develop such an accurate correlation, various parameters such as porosity, cementation factor, permeability, and viscosity were included to history match the experimental data and tune the diffusivity correlation. Next the validity of the correlation was proved using 3D experimental data and data obtained from a field pilot test. It has been observed that diffusion rate is not only a function of viscosity but also it is a function of permeability, porosity, and cementation factor. [Received: October 16, 2013; Accepted: April 24, 2014]

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Oil Gas and Coal TechnologySame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207