ArticleScientific reports2024
Reservoir rock typing assessment in a coal-tight sand based heterogeneous geological formation through advanced AI methods.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Sequence division and coal facies research methods of the deep No. 8 coal seam in the Daning-Jixian Block, eastern margin of Ordos basin.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Geoscientists now identify coal layers using conventional well logs. Coal layer identification is the main technical difficulty in coalbed methane exploration and development. This research uses advanced quantile-quantile plot, self-organizing maps (SOM), k-means clustering, t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE) and qualitative log curve assessment through three wells (X4, X5, X6) in complex geological formation to distinguish coal from tight sand and shale. Also, we identify the reservoir rock typing (RRT), gas-bearing and non-gas bearing potential zones. Results showed gamma-ray and resistivity logs are not reliable tools for coal identification. Further, coal layers highlighted high acoustic (AC) and neutron porosity (CNL), low density (DEN), low photoelectric, and low porosity values as compared to tight sand and shale. While, tight sand highlighted 5-10% porosity values. The SOM and clustering assessment provided the evidence of good-quality RRT for tight sand facies, whereas other clusters related to shale and coal showed poor-quality RRT. A t-SNE algorithm accurately distinguished coal and was used to make CNL and DEN plot that showed the presence of low-rank bituminous coal rank in study area. The presented strategy through conventional logs shall provide help to comprehend coal-tight sand lithofacies units for future mining.
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.