ArticleScientific reports2025
Modeling residue formation from crude oil oxidation using tree-based machine learning approaches.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Investigation of thermal conductivity for nano-improved polyethylene glycol composites.Discover nano · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In-situ combustion (ISC) offers a compelling solution for enhancing oil recovery, particularly for heavy crude oils. This process involves the oxidation and pyrolysis of hydrocarbons, generating heat and depositing fuel in the combustion front. In this work, the thermo-oxidative profiles and residue formation of crude oils during thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) were modeled using 3075 experimental data points from 18 crude oils with API gravities ranging from 5 to 42. Four advanced tree-based machine learning algorithms comprising gradient boosting with categorical features support (CatBoost), light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM), random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) were utilized to develop accurate predictive models. The results indicated that CatBoost outperformed the other models, achieving mean absolute relative error (MARE) values of 4.95% for the entire dataset, 5.92% for the testing subset, and 4.71% for the training subset. Moreover, it recorded a determination coefficient (R
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.