ArticleACS omega2025
Optimized Gradient Boosting Models for Adaptive Prediction of Uniaxial Compressive Strength in Carbonate Rocks Using Drilling Data.
Article in ACS omega, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) is a critical geo-mechanical property used to assess the mechanical properties of subsurface formations. While the traditional laboratory tests for UCS estimation are accurate, they are time-consuming and costly. The advancements in machine learning offer a more efficient option for UCS prediction using real-time data. This work investigates the predictive ability of three types of Gradient Boosting Machines (GBMs): Standard Gradient Boosting, Stochastic Gradient Boosting, and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) for UCS prediction. Unlike conventional machine learning approaches, which depend on static model inputs, lagging techniques were applied where drilling depth data from earlier depths were used as input features, allowing for dynamic model changes and enhanced prediction accuracy as new data is acquired in real time. The data set included 2056 drilling data points, comprising rate of penetration (ROP), mud pumping rate (GPM), standpipe pressure (SPP), rotary speed (RPM), torque (T), and weight on bit (WOB), with an unseen validation data set of 870 points. Hyperparameter optimization significantly improved the prediction performance with XGBoost achieving superior accuracy, shown by the lowest error metrics across the test and validation data set. This technique offers significant potential for improving real-time UCS predictions in carbonate formations, enhancing drilling efficiency while reducing risks such as wellbore instability.
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.