ArticleScientific reports2025
Ensemble learning for prediction of inorganic scale formation: A case study in Oman.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inorganic scale formation is one of the major flow assurance issues in geothermal energy, oil, and water production due to its damaging effects on formation rock, wells, and transportation facilities. Owing to the intricate nature of scale formation, developing a closed-form mathematical formulation for its prediction is difficult. Thereby, the ability of six machine learning algorithms and a Power Law Ensemble Model (PLEM) to predict inorganic scale formation in carbonate formations is examined in this study. A new dataset of scale formation from realistic wells in Oman, which included temperature, pressure, artificial lift, ionic composition, pH, total dissolved solids, and scale formation tendency of each well, was collected from two reservoirs (Natih and Shuaiba). The machine learning models are Naive Bayes (NA), Random Forest (RF), Logistic Regression (LR), Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Decision Tree (DT). The results revealed that the RF, KNN and DT provided the best predictions among the individual experts with a F1-scores of 78.6%, 75.9%, and 71.0%, respectively. By integrating the predictions of the individual experts using the PLEM method, the F1-score increased to 90.3% on the test subset. Moreover, a study was conducted to find out some rules of thumb for each input that cause scale formation, but the results showed that there was no explicit condition, indicating that scale formation is a complicated phenomenon requiring advanced modeling approaches. Finally, a new water analysis report was given to the PLEM (as the best model) to predict scale formation in a well that demonstrated a match between the predicted class and the report outcome.
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.