ArticleScientific reports2026
Predicting drainage capillary pressure curves in natural porous media by NMR-T
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP) tests are used to characterize capillary profiles of geological formations. For CO2 geo-storage, sealing and trapping capacity is often assessed by converting air–mercury curves into brine–CO2 curves. These tests, however, are typically performed only at sparse intervals along the well. To extend coverage, many studies have attempted to derive continuous pseudo-capillary pressure curves from NMR T2 measurements. Conventional approaches match T2 and MICP curves to estimate surface relaxivity as a conversion factor, but this assumes uniform relaxivity and simple pore geometry, conditions rarely valid for complex lithologies and requiring calibration by rock type. Because conversion of cumulative T2 response into capillary curve depends on lithology, we introduce J parameter based on sample gas porosity and permeability (J), bimodality index (BI) for quantifying the degree of peak separation in T2 spectrum, and the bin-weighted T2 logarithmic mean (T2lmA) to allow autonomous rock typing by the model. Using these features, a CatBoost model was trained on 30 core samples (carbonates, sandstones, tight mudstones) spanning permeabilities from 0.001 to 11,050 mD. For the training set, the MICP and NMR T2 distributions of 30 rock cores were subsampled resulting in 3112 datapoints. Blind test subset comprised 6 additional cores kept outside the training loop. In the blind test phase, the model reproduced MICP curves across 10− 1–105 psi (7 × 10− 4–7 × 102 MPa) pressure range with mean R2 = 0.94, and SHg saturation mean absolute error of 3.6% indicating reliable estimation of air–mercury and by conversion to brine–CO2 curves.
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.