ArticleScientific reports2025
Precise forecasting of shear stress, viscosity, and density for an aqueous CuO/CaCO
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.
- Comparative assessment of machine learning models for polymer solution viscosity prediction in enhanced oil recovery.Scientific reports · 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
The accurate prediction of thermophysical properties in hybrid nanofluids is crucial for enhancing the efficiency of advanced heat transfer and energy conversion systems. Most published research has largely concentrated on single- or binary-nanoparticle systems, and ternary hybrid systems are still poorly understood in terms of interactions. The present study, however, developed two-layer feedforward artificial neural networks to predict shear stress, viscosity, and density for a water-based nanofluid containing copper oxide, calcium carbonate, and silicon dioxide in volume ratios of 60, 30, and 10%, respectively. Training and validation of the networks were based on experimental data collected at temperatures ranging from 25 to 70 °C and nanoparticle volume fractions ranging from 0.5 to 3%. That model achieved outstanding predictive performance, with average root-mean-square errors (evaluated via K-fold cross-validation) of 0.0008 Pa for shear stress, 0.0097 mPa s for viscosity, and 0.0003 g/cm³ for density. Minimum mean squared errors were 1.63 × 10⁻⁶, 3.11 × 10⁻⁵, and 4.03 × 10⁻⁵, respectively, with correlation coefficients over 0.999 across all data sets. The calculated maximum relative errors were 0.71% for shear stress, 1.34% for viscosity, and 0.06% for density, which endorse the reliability and precision of the produced model. Further sensitivity analysis demonstrated that temperature dominance over shear stress and viscosity, although nanoparticle concentration exerted a significantly stronger impact on density. The proposed framework served as an accurate, data-driven tool for modeling ternary hybrid nanofluids, providing practical insights into their optimized formulations for high-performance thermal management applications.
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.