ArticleScientific reports2023
Optimizing acidizing design and effectiveness assessment with machine learning for predicting post-acidizing permeability.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel hybrid CCD-ML approach for predicting permeability alterations in carbonate reservoir rocks during waterflooding under scale inhibitor treatment.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Numerical simulation of the temporal and spatial evolution of sandstone pore type reservoir damage types and severity.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A novel formulation of an eco-friendly calcium nitrate-based heavy completion fluid.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Pore-Scale Numerical Simulation of Acid-Rock Reaction Processes in Carbonate Reservoirs.ACS omega · 2024Article
- A comparative study of brine solutions as completion fluids for oil and gas fields.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Sandstone chemical consolidation and wettability improvement using furan polymer-based nanofluid.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Mechanistic analysis of matrix-acid treatment of carbonate formations: An experimental core flooding study.Heliyon · 2024Article
- A comprehensive analysis of carbonate matrix acidizing using viscoelastic diverting acid system in a gas field.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Machine learning approaches for estimating interfacial tension between oil/gas and oil/water systems: a performance analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Formation damage poses a widespread challenge in the oil and gas industry, leading to diminished permeability, flow rates, and overall well productivity. Acidizing is a commonly employed technique aimed at mitigating damage and enhancing permeability. In this study, to predict the permeability after acidizing in oil and gas reservoirs, three machine learning models, namely artificial neural networks, random forest, and XGBoost, along with genetic programming were used to estimate permeability changes after acidizing. These models are utilized to estimate permeability changes following acidizing operations. Training of the models involved a dataset comprising 218 acidizing operations conducted in diverse reservoirs across Iran. The input parameters, namely permeability, porosity, skin factor, calcite mineral fraction, acid injection rate, and injected acid volume, were optimized through the use of a genetic algorithm. Statistical and graphical analysis of the results demonstrates that genetic programming outperformed the other machine learning techniques, yielding superior performance with R square and RMSE values of 0.82 and 17.65, respectively. Nevertheless, the other models also exhibited commendable performance, surpassing an R square value of 0.73. The post-acidizing permeability data obtained from core flooding experiments conducted on carbonate and sandstone cores was utilized to validate the models. The genetic programming model demonstrates an average error of 21.1%. The evaluation of post-acidizing permeability using genetic programming, in comparison with the results obtained from the core-flood test, revealed errors of 22.95% and 32.4% for carbonate and sandstone cores, respectively. Furthermore, a comparison between the calculated post-acidizing permeability derived from the GP model and previous studies indicated errors within the range of 8.6-26.59%. The findings highlight the potential of genetic programming and machine learning algorithms in accurately predicting post-acidizing permeability, thereby aiding in acidizing design, effectiveness assessment, and ultimately enhancing oil and gas production rates.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.