Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41991568›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Soft computing models for predicting polymer viscosity across wide thermal and ionic-strength conditions.

Farhood Navaie, Mehdi Mahdaviara, Mohammad Sharifi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Farhood NavaieDepartment of Petroleum and Geoenergy Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Mehdi MahdaviaraDepartment of Petroleum and Geoenergy Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad SharifiDepartment of Petroleum and Geoenergy Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran. m_sharifi@aut.ac.ir.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Characterizing polymer properties under varying thermal and ionic-strength conditions is crucial across diverse fields, from materials science to environmental engineering. While experimental techniques are effective, they are often time-consuming and costly, underscoring the need for rapid, reliable computational alternatives. This study evaluates the performance of various soft computing techniques, ranging from traditional machine learning methods (MLP, SVR, RF, GBM, LGBM, and XGB) to advanced deep learning approaches (CNNs), for predicting polymer viscosity under diverse temperature and salinity conditions. The models are trained on a curated database of 4,366 experimental measurements spanning ten commercially used polymers and wide ranges of molecular weight, polymer concentration, temperature, salinity, and shear rate. Using hold-out validation, 10-fold cross-validation, and a strict unseen-polymer test, all models achieve high accuracy (test R² ≥ 0.98), with LGBM and CNN providing the best overall performance. Compared with traditional models (MLP and SVR), these methods reduce test-set error metrics by approximately 25–30%, and the CNN attains R² = 0.997 on the unseen-polymer dataset. Permutation-importance analysis identifies polymer concentration as the dominant predictor, followed by shear rate and molecular weight, in agreement with established rheological behavior. The results demonstrate that ensemble and deep learning models can serve as fast, reliable surrogates for polymer viscosity across high-temperature and high-salinity conditions, reducing experimental effort and supporting data-driven optimization of polymer selection and operating conditions.

Indexed as

Deep learningEnsemble learningPolymer rheologySoft computingViscosity prediction

Identifiers

PMID41991568
PMCPMC13246778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.