ArticleMethodsX2025
Filling-well: An effective technique to handle incomplete well-log data for lithology classification using machine learning algorithms.
Article in MethodsX, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- XGBoost regression for robust acoustic impedance prediction in the absence of density and sonic logs.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Scour depth estimation using standalone metaheuristic algorithms and their combinations with CatBoost.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Well log data generation and imputation using sequence based generative adversarial networks.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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lithology classification is crucial for efficient and sustainable resource exploration in the oil and gas industry. Missing values in well-log data, such as Gamma Ray (GR), Neutron Porosity (NPHI), Bulk Density (RHOB), Deep Resistivity (RS), Delta Time Compressional (DTCO), Delta Time Shear (DTSM), and Resistivity Deep (RD), significantly affect machine learning classification accuracy. This study applied three algorithms, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), K-nearest neighbours (KNN), and the artificial neural network (ANN), to handle missing values in well-log datasets, particularly datasets with extreme missing data (30 %). Results indicated that XGBoost was the most efficient and accurate, especially for RHOB, NPHI, DTCO, and DTSM, with the lowest Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) values. The ANN also performed effectively, particularly on the GR, RS, and RD features, after the use of preprocessing techniques such as isolation forest and bias correction. However, the ANN can suffer from overfitting and requires large datasets for optimal performance. In contrast, KNN struggled with missing-not-at-random (MNAR) data due to its reliance on the k parameter and distance metric, making it less effective in mapping missing data relationships.•Missing values in well-log data can hinder lithology classification accuracy for efficient resource exploration in the oil and gas industry.•This research aims to address the problem of missing values in well-log datasets by applying machine learning algorithms such as XGBoost, ANN, and KNN to enhance classification performance.•XGBoost demonstrated superior performance in handling extreme missing data (30 %) in well-log datasets. ANN was effective but prone to overfitting for small datasets, while KNN struggled with missing-not-at-random (MNAR) data due to limitations in its distance-based approach.
Indexed as
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.