ArticleACS omega2026
Prediction and Controlling Factors of Macrolithotypes in Deep Coal Reservoirs.
Article in ACS omega, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deep coalbed methane (CBM) in the Ordos Basin is a critical resource for China's unconventional gas supply. Accurate identification of coal macrolithotypes is essential for reservoir characterization and guiding efficient exploration and development. However, the deep coal seams in the Ordos Basin feature complex geological conditions and strong spatial heterogeneity. Traditional prediction models exhibit low accuracy at the basin-wide scale, thereby constraining the fine-scale identification of macrolithotypes. This study proposes a machine learning prediction workflow driven by dual geological constraints: roof lithology and burial depth. Based on core samples and well-logging data, multiple machine learning models were constructed to evaluate and compare the performance of global models versus geologically partitioned models. The findings reveal that (1) Geologically partitioned modeling significantly outperforms global modeling, and the optimal prediction models vary distinctly under different geological backgrounds. (2) Within the depth and regional scope of this study, the distribution of macrolithotypes is dominated by sedimentary microfacies. Bright coal is most extensively developed beneath limestone roofs (accounting for 53.3%), corresponding to a low-lying mire facies with stable hydrodynamics, whereas semibright coal dominates beneath sandstone roofs. (3) A "geology-engineering" dual sweet-spot evaluation paradigm is proposed: the "limestone roof + bright coal" combination, characterized by exceptionally high gas content, serves as the premier geological resource sweet spot; conversely, the "sandstone roof + semibright coal" combination, featuring a higher elastic modulus and stress stability, acts as an engineering stable-production sweet spot that ensures long-term fracture conductivity. This study provides a robust scientific basis for sweet-spot evaluation and tailored fracturing designs in deep CBM exploration.
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.