ArticleScientific data2026
A dataset and benchmark of carbonate thin-section images for deep learning.
Article in Scientific data, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning has become a key tool for carbonate thin-section image analysis. However, the lack of large public datasets limits reproducibility and fair model comparison. To address this, we present DeepCarbonate, a cleaned and standardized benchmark dataset. Samples were collected from the Ediacaran Dengying, Cambrian Longwangmiao, and Triassic Leikoupo and Jialingjiang Formations in the Sichuan Basin, China, and the Cretaceous Mishrif Formation in the UAE. The dataset was curated by petroleum geology experts; invalid images (blurred, low brightness, or corrupted) were removed through expert voting and 2σ filtering, and all images were reorganized in the ImageNet format. DeepCarbonate contains 22 lithological categories, hierarchically organized by optical mode (PPL, XPL, R) and split into train, validation, and test subsets, ensuring standardized benchmarking and reproducible experiments. Using PyTorch with CUDA acceleration, we evaluated ResNet, VGG, DenseNet, MobileNet, and EfficientNet models under baseline, ablation, long tailed distribution, and balanced Top 9 subset experiments. Results highlight the dataset's value as a robust benchmark for carbonate petrography research and applications.
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.