Table 1 Key features of few existing ML-based predictive models for UCS of shales.
Reference | Input features | Predictor algorithms | Evaluation metrics |
---|---|---|---|
Davoodi et al.45 | Depth, weight on the drill bit (WOB), drill-string rotation speed (RPM), rate of penetration (ROP), and torque (Trq) | Least-squares support-vector machine (LSSVM) and multi-layer extreme learning machine (MELM) algorithms | RMSE = 4.0623, R2 = 0.8975 SD = 5.6835 Absolute average percentage deviation = AAPD = 7.4231 |
Kolawole and Assaad46 | Density, treatment period, temperature, Core length, Poisson’s ratio | K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Decision Tree (DT), and Random Forest (RF) | RF model (UCS: R2 = 0.9613; MAE = 6.15 MPa; MPE = 2.62%; VAF = 96.16%; |
Mollaei et al.47 | Shear wave velocity, core properties | MLP, CLM algorithm | R2(MLP) = 0.8727 R2(CLM) = 0.9274 |
Miah et al.48 | Resistivity, density, porosity, shear wave velocity | ANN, least square support vector machine, (LS-SVM) | For ANN, RMSE = 2.593 MAPE = 0.21, R2 = 0.9736 |