Calculating porosity and permeability from synthetic micro‐ <scp>CT</scp> scan images based on a hybrid artificial intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nowadays, lattice Boltzmann is one of the standard and exact methods of simulation in micro‐CT images of rock. However, it has a high weakness in run time. Therefore, the effort in this article is to reach a comprehensive substitute method for permeability calculation with less run time than the lattice Boltzmann method. The other purposes are the automation of processing operations, preparation of images, and in the end, the calculation of porosity. The best way to achieve these outcomes is to use hybrid artificial intelligence. In this research work, comprehensive model architecture has been used to design a hybrid artificial intelligence to be able to calculate permeability and porosity in complex images. A thousand images were randomly generated with high complexity, which makes the model comprehensive and extensible, and image processing was applied. After that, the lattice Boltzmann method as the direct simulation was selected. Finally, the convolutional neural network and multilayer perceptron based on a new and comprehensive model were evaluated for the first time; the mean squared error resulting from the evaluation of training data is 0.01, and the test data is 0.03. Expert systems have been used as a subset of artificial intelligence for automated image processing and porosity calculation. In this way, problems related to the direct implementation of classical algorithms for image processing, models, and patterns related to machine learning and needing an expert were solved to an acceptable extent, and an error of less than 5% was achieved.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".