ArticleScientific reports2026
Pioneering oil and nitrogen interfacial tension using evolutionarily optimized gradient boosting machine.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate prediction of oil–nitrogen interfacial tension (IFT) is critical for designing efficient enhanced oil recovery (EOR) strategies. Traditional empirical correlations often lack generalizability and demand detailed compositional data, motivating the need for robust machine learning frameworks. In this study, Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) models were developed and optimized using four metaheuristic algorithms including Artificial Bee Colony (ABC), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), Coupled Simulated Annealing (CSA), and Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA) to predict equilibrium IFT under varying pressures, temperatures, and API gravities. A curated dataset of 148 experimental measurements was validated through outlier detection and evaluated using five-fold cross-validation to ensure generalization. Model performance was assessed using R2, mean squared error (MSE), and average absolute relative error percentage (AARE%). Comparative results demonstrate that the ABC-optimized GBM achieved the highest test R2 and competitive error metrics, outperforming other optimization strategies in predictive reliability. SHAP analysis further confirmed pressure and temperature as the dominant factors influencing IFT, with API gravity exerting a secondary effect. The findings not only establish the ABC-GBM framework as a powerful predictive tool but also reinforce the physical plausibility of the results, offering practical guidance for process optimization in nitrogen-based EOR 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.