Leveraging advanced ensemble learning techniques for methane uptake prediction in metal organic frameworks
Pardakhti, M., Moharreri, E., Wanik, D., Suib, S. L. & Srivastava, R. Machine learning using combined structural and chemical descriptors for prediction of methane adsorption performance of metal organic frameworks (MOFs). ACS Comb. Sci. 19, 640–645 (2017).
Google Scholar
Konstas, K. et al. Methane storage in metal organic frameworks. J. Mater. Chem. 22, 16698–16708 (2012).
Google Scholar
Pucker, J., Zwart, R. & Jungmeier, G. Greenhouse gas and energy analysis of substitute natural gas from biomass for space heat. Biomass Bioenerg. 38, 95–101 (2012).
Google Scholar
He, Y., Zhou, W., Qian, G. & Chen, B. Methane storage in metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev. 43, 5657–5678 (2014).
Google Scholar
Gulsoy, Z., Sezginel, K. B., Uzun, A., Keskin, S. & Yıldırım, R. Analysis of CH4 uptake over metal–organic frameworks using data-mining tools. ACS Comb. Sci. 21, 257–268 (2019).
Google Scholar
Mason, J. A. et al. Methane storage in flexible metal–organic frameworks with intrinsic thermal management. Nature 527, 357–361 (2015).
Google Scholar
Li, P. & Tezel, F. H. Adsorption separation of N2, O2, CO2 and CH4 gases by β-zeolite. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 98, 94–101 (2007).
Google Scholar
Seabra, R., Ribeiro, A. M., Gleichmann, K., Ferreira, A. F. & Rodrigues, A. E. Adsorption equilibrium and kinetics of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen on binderless zeolite 4A adsorbents. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 277, 105–114 (2019).
Google Scholar
Zhou, L. et al. Synthesis of ordered mesoporous carbon molecular sieve and its adsorption capacity for H2, N2, O2, CH4 and CO2. Chem. Phys. Lett. 413, 6–9 (2005).
Google Scholar
Xu, X., Zhao, X., Sun, L. & Liu, X. Adsorption separation of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen on monoethanol amine modified β-zeolite. J. Nat. Gas Chem. 18, 167–172 (2009).
Google Scholar
Qu, D. et al. Microstructure effect of carbon materials on the low-concentration methane adsorption separation from its mixture with nitrogen. Adsorption 24, 357–369 (2018).
Google Scholar
Eyer, S., Stadie, N. P., Borgschulte, A., Emmenegger, L. & Mohn, J. Methane preconcentration by adsorption: a methodology for materials and conditions selection. Adsorption 20, 657–666 (2014).
Google Scholar
Wang, B. et al. Applications of metal–organic frameworks for green energy and environment: new advances in adsorptive gas separation, storage and removal. Green. Energy Environ. 3, 191–228 (2018).
Google Scholar
Yang, J., Wang, Y., Li, L., Zhang, Z. & Li, J. Protection of open-metal V (III) sites and their associated CO2/CH4/N2/O2/H2O adsorption properties in mesoporous V-MOFs. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 456, 197–205 (2015).
Google Scholar
Li, L. et al. Highly efficient separation of methane from nitrogen on a squarate-based metal‐organic framework. AIChE J. 64, 3681–3689 (2018).
Google Scholar
Ursueguía, D., Díaz, E., Vega, A. & Ordóñez, S. Methane separation from diluted mixtures by fixed bed adsorption using mofs: model validation and parametric studies. Sep. Purif. Technol. 251, 117374 (2020).
Slater, A. G. & Cooper, A. I. Function-led design of new porous materials. Science 348, aaa8075 (2015).
Google Scholar
Farha, O. K. et al. De Novo synthesis of a metal–organic framework material featuring ultrahigh surface area and gas storage capacities. Nat. Chem. 2, 944–948 (2010).
Google Scholar
Islamoglu, T. et al. Postsynthetic tuning of metal–organic frameworks for targeted applications. Acc. Chem. Res. 50, 805–813 (2017).
Google Scholar
Bloch, E. D. et al. Hydrocarbon separations in a metal-organic framework with open iron (II) coordination sites. science 335, 1606–1610 (2012).
Herm, Z. R. et al. Separation of hexane isomers in a metal-organic framework with triangular channels. Science 340, 960–964 (2013).
Google Scholar
McDonald, T. M. et al. Cooperative insertion of CO2 in diamine-appended metal-organic frameworks. Nature 519, 303–308 (2015).
Google Scholar
Sivaramakrishnan, K. & Mahmoud, E. Development of a High-Accuracy statistical model to identify the key parameter for methane adsorption in Metal-Organic frameworks. Analytica 3, 335–370 (2022).
Google Scholar
Han, B. & Chakraborty, A. Synthesis and characteristics of ionic liquid-implanted HKUST-1 metal–organic frameworks for transforming heat into extraordinary water transfer. J. S C Eng. 12, 8115–8127 (2024).
Google Scholar
Han, B. & Chakraborty, A. J. D. Ligand extension of aluminum fumarate metal-organic framework in transferring higher water for adsorption desalination. Desalination. 592, 118135 (2024).
Han, B. & Chakraborty, A. J. J. O. C. P. Synergistic ionic liquid encapsulated MIL-101 (Cr) metal-organic frameworks for an innovative adsorption desalination system. Journal of Cleaner Production. 474, 143565 (2024).
Han, B., Chevrier, S. M., Yan, Q., Gabriel, J. C. P. & Technology, P. J. S. Tailorable metal–organic framework based thin film nanocomposite membrane for lithium recovery from wasted batteries. Separation and Purification Technology. 334, 125943 (2024).
Han, B. et al. Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) in aqueous batteries (ABs): unlocking potential through innovative materials design. 1–35 (2025).
Han, B. et al. Enhanced silver recovery from electronic wastes using ionic liquid-integrated nanocomposite membrane. Separation and Purification Technology. 366, 132689 (2025).
Shi, Z. et al. Machine-learning-assisted high-throughput computational screening of high performance metal–organic frameworks. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. 5, 725–742 (2020).
Google Scholar
Okoro, H. K., Ayika, S. O., Ngila, J. C. & Tella, A. C. Rising profile on the use of metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) for the removal of heavy metals from the environment: an overview. Appl. Water Sci. 8, 1–10 (2018).
Gandara-Loe, J., Pastor-Perez, L., Bobadilla, L., Odriozola, J. & Reina, T. Understanding the opportunities of metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) for CO 2 capture and gas-phase CO 2 conversion processes: a comprehensive overview. Reaction Chem. Eng. 6, 787–814 (2021).
Google Scholar
Pettinari, C. & Tombesi, A. Metal–organic frameworks for carbon dioxide capture. MRS Energy Sustain. 7, E35 (2020).
Naghizadeh, A., Larestani, A., Amar, M. N. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. Predicting viscosity of CO2–N2 gaseous mixtures using advanced intelligent schemes. J Pet. Sci. Eng, 208, Part A, 109359 (2021).
Mahdaviara, M., Larestani, A., Amar, M. N. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. On the evaluation of permeability of heterogeneous carbonate reservoirs using rigorous data-driven techniques. J Pet. Sci. Eng, 208, Part D, 109685 (2022).
Lv, Q. et al. Modelling minimum miscibility pressure of CO2-crude oil systems using deep learning, tree-based, and thermodynamic models: application to CO2 sequestration and enhanced oil recovery. Sep. Purif. Technol. 310, 123086 (2023).
Google Scholar
Larestani, A., Mousavi, S. P., Hadavimoghaddam, F., Ostadhassan, M. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. Predicting the surfactant-polymer flooding performance in chemical enhanced oil recovery: cascade neural network and gradient boosting decision tree. Alexandria Eng. J 61, 7715–7731(2022).
Larestani, A., Mousavi, S. P., Hadavimoghaddam, F. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. Predicting formation damage of oil fields due to mineral scaling during water-flooding operations: gradient boosting decision tree and cascade-forward back-propagation network. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 208, 109315 (2022).
Google Scholar
Larestani, A., Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A., Samari, Z. & Ostadhassan, M. Compositional modeling of the oil formation volume factor of crude oil systems: application of intelligent models and equations of state. ACS Omega. 7, 24256–24273 (2022).
Google Scholar
Larestani, A., Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. & Naseri, A. Experimental measurement and compositional modeling of bubble point pressure in crude oil systems: soft computing approaches, correlations, and equations of state. J Pet. Sci. Eng, 212, 110271 (2022).
Hashemizadeh, A., Maaref, A., Shateri, M., Larestani, A. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. Experimental measurement and modeling of water-based drilling mud density using adaptive boosting decision tree, support vector machine, and K-nearest neighbors: A case study from the South Pars gas field. J Pet. Sci. Eng, 207, 109132 (2021).
Amar, M. N., Larestani, A., Lv, Q., Zhou, T. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. Modeling of methane adsorption capacity in shale gas formations using white-box supervised machine learning techniques. J Pet. Sci. Eng, 208, Part B, 109226 (2021).
Amiri-Ramsheh, B. et al. Toward accurate prediction of carbon dioxide (CO2) compressibility factor using tree-based intelligent schemes (XGBoost and LightGBM) and equations of state. Results in Engineering, 25, 104035 (2025).
Larestani, A. et al. Toward reliable prediction of CO2 uptake capacity of metal–organic frameworks (MOFs): implementation of white-box machine learning. Adsorption, 30, 1985–2003 (2024).
Larestani, A., Sahebalzamani, S., Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. & Naseri, A. J. S. R. Compositional modeling of solution gas–oil ratio (Rs): a comparative study of tree-based models, neural networks, and equations of state. Scientific Reports, 15, 8428 (2025).
Lv, Q. et al. White-box machine-learning models for accurate interfacial tension prediction in hydrogen–brine mixtures. Clean Energy, 8, 252–264 (2024).
Lv, Q. et al. Modelling minimum miscibility pressure of CO2-crude oil systems using deep learning, tree-based, and thermodynamic models: application to CO2 sequestration and enhanced oil recovery. Separation and Purification Technology, 310, 123086 (2023).
Mohammadi, M. R., Larestani, A., Schaffie, M., Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. & Ranjbar, M. J. S. R. Predictive modeling of CO2 solubility in piperazine aqueous solutions using boosting algorithms for carbon capture goals. Scientific Reports, 14, 22112 (2024).
Mcilwaine, F., Smit, B. & Garcia, S. M&Ms: MOFs, Machine learning, & Methane separation. Machine learning, & Methane separation (November 24,) (2022).) (2022). (2022).
Abid, H. R., Pham, G. H., Ang, H. M., Tade, M. O. & Wang, S. Adsorption of CH4 and CO2 on Zr-metal organic frameworks. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 366, 120–124 (2012).
Google Scholar
Chowdhury, P., Mekala, S., Dreisbach, F. & Gumma, S. Adsorption of CO, CO2 and CH4 on Cu-BTC and MIL-101 metal organic frameworks: effect of open metal sites and adsorbate Polarity. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 152, 246–252 (2012).
Google Scholar
Furukawa, H. et al. Ultrahigh porosity in metal-organic frameworks. Science 329, 424–428 (2010).
Google Scholar
García, E. J. et al. Role of structure and chemistry in controlling separations of CO2/CH4 and CO2/CH4/CO mixtures over honeycomb MOFs with coordinatively unsaturated metal sites. J. Phys. Chem. C. 116, 26636–26648 (2012).
Hamon, L. et al. Co-adsorption and separation of CO2 – CH4 mixtures in the highly flexible MIL-53 (Cr) MOF. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131, 17490–17499 (2009).
Google Scholar
Giorgia, M. & Richard, B. High Pressure Adsorption of CO2 and CH4 on Zr-MOFs. (2014).
Meng, W. et al. Tuning expanded pores in metal–organic frameworks for selective capture and catalytic conversion of carbon dioxide. ChemSusChem 11, 3751–3757 (2018).
Google Scholar
Mishra, P., Mekala, S., Dreisbach, F., Mandal, B. & Gumma, S. Adsorption of CO2, CO, CH4 and N2 on a zinc based metal organic framework. Sep. Purif. Technol. 94, 124–130 (2012).
Google Scholar
Mishra, P., Edubilli, S., Mandal, B. & Gumma, S. Adsorption of CO2, CO, CH4 and N2 on DABCO based metal organic frameworks. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 169, 75–80 (2013).
Google Scholar
Munusamy, K. et al. Sorption of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen and carbon monoxide on MIL-101 (Cr): volumetric measurements and dynamic adsorption studies. Chem. Eng. J. 195, 359–368 (2012).
Rada, Z. H. et al. Effects of -NO2 and -NH2 functional groups in mixed-linker Zr-based MOFs on gas adsorption of CO2 and CH4. Progress Nat. Science: Mater. Int. 28, 160–167. (2018).
Google Scholar
Ullah, S. et al. Synthesis, and characterization of metal-organic frameworks-177 for static and dynamic adsorption behavior of CO2 and CH4. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 288, 109569 (2019).
Google Scholar
Wang, X., Wang, Y., Lu, K., Jiang, W. & Dai, F. A 3D Ba-MOF for selective adsorption of CO2/CH4 and CO2/N2. Chin. Chem. Lett. 32, 1169–1172 (2021).
Google Scholar
Wu, X., Yuan, B., Bao, Z. & Deng, S. Adsorption of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen on an ultramicroporous copper metal–organic framework. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 430, 78–84 (2014).
Google Scholar
Xiang, S. et al. Microporous metal-organic framework with potential for carbon dioxide capture at ambient conditions. Nat. Commun. 3, 954 (2012).
Google Scholar
Yu, D., Yazaydin, A. O., Lane, J. R., Dietzel, P. D. & Snurr, R. Q. A combined experimental and quantum chemical study of CO 2 adsorption in the metal–organic framework CPO-27 with different metals. Chem. Sci. 4, 3544–3556 (2013).
Google Scholar
Yuan, D., Zhao, D., Sun, D. & Zhou, H. C. An isoreticular series of metal–organic frameworks with dendritic hexacarboxylate ligands and exceptionally high gas-uptake capacity. Angew. Chem. 122, 5485–5489 (2010).
Google Scholar
Zhang, Z., Li, Z. & Li, J. Computational study of adsorption and separation of CO2, CH4, and N2 by an rht-type metal–organic framework. Langmuir 28, 12122–12133 (2012).
Google Scholar
Zhang, W., Huang, H., Zhong, C. & Liu, D. Cooperative effect of temperature and linker functionality on CO 2 capture from industrial gas mixtures in metal–organic frameworks: a combined experimental and molecular simulation study. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 14, 2317–2325 (2012).
Google Scholar
Cavka, J. H., Grande, C. A., Mondino, G. & Blom, R. High pressure adsorption of CO2 and CH4 on Zr-MOFs. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 53, 15500–15507 (2014).
Google Scholar
Bentéjac, C., Csörgő, A. & Martínez-Muñoz, G. A comparative analysis of gradient boosting algorithms. Artif. Intell. Rev. 54, 1937–1967 (2021).
Bikmukhametov, T. & Jäschke, J. Oil production monitoring using gradient boosting machine learning algorithm. Ifac-Papersonline 52, 514–519 (2019).
Yang, H. et al. Optimization of tight gas reservoir fracturing parameters via gradient boosting regression modeling. Heliyon, 10, (2024).
El-Amin, M. F., Subasi, A., Selim, M. M. & Mousa, A. Predicted oil recovery scaling-law using stochastic gradient boosting regression model. Cmc-Comput Mater. Contin. 68, 2349–2362 (2021).
Larestani, A., Mousavi, S. P., Hadavimoghaddam, F., Ostadhassan, M. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. Predicting the surfactant-polymer flooding performance in chemical enhanced oil recovery: cascade neural network and gradient boosting decision tree. Alexandria Eng. J. 61, 7715–7731 (2022).
Rashidi-Khaniabadi, A., Rashidi-Khaniabadi, E., Amiri-Ramsheh, B., Mohammadi, M. R. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. Modeling interfacial tension of surfactant–hydrocarbon systems using robust tree-based machine learning algorithms. Sci. Rep. 13, 10836 (2023).
Google Scholar
Zhang, H., Wu, W. & Wu, H. TOC prediction using a gradient boosting decision tree method: A case study of shale reservoirs in Qinshui basin. Geoenergy Sci. Eng. 221, 111271 (2023).
Google Scholar
Mahmoudzadeh, A. et al. Modeling CO2 solubility in water using gradient boosting and light gradient boosting machine. Sci. Rep. 14, 13511 (2024).
Google Scholar
Chen, T. & Guestrin, C. in Proceedings of the 22nd acm sigkdd international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. 785–794.
Zhang, J. et al. A unified intelligent model for estimating the (gas + n-alkane) interfacial tension based on the eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) trees. Fuel 282, 118783 (2020).
Google Scholar
Dong, Y. et al. A data-driven model for predicting initial productivity of offshore directional well based on the physical constrained eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) trees. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 211, 110176 (2022).
Google Scholar
Siqueira-Filho, E. A., Lira, M. F. A., Converti, A., Siqueira, H. V. & Bastos-Filho, C. J. Predicting thermoelectric power plants diesel/heavy fuel oil engine fuel consumption using univariate forecasting and XGBoost machine learning models. Energies 16, 2942 (2023).
Dong, Y. et al. A physics-guided eXtreme gradient boosting model for predicting the initial productivity of oil wells. Geoenergy Sci. Eng. 231, 212402 (2023).
Google Scholar
Luo, R. et al. An eXtreme gradient boosting algorithm combining artificial bee colony parameters optimized technique for single sand body identification. IEEE Access. 9, 156894–156906 (2021).
Nakhaei-Kohani, R. et al. Extensive data analysis and modelling of carbon dioxide solubility in ionic liquids using chemical Structure-Based ensemble learning approaches. Fluid Phase Equilibria, 585, 114166 (2024).
Shakouri, S. & Mohammadzadeh-Shirazi, M. Modeling of asphaltic sludge formation during acidizing process of oil well reservoir using machine learning methods. Energy 285, 129433 (2023).
Google Scholar
Tang, J. et al. A new ensemble machine-learning framework for searching sweet spots in shale reservoirs. SPE J. 26, 482–497 (2021).
Google Scholar
Tang, J. et al. in International Petroleum Technology Conference. D033S098R001 (IPTC).
Langeroudy, K. P. A., Esfahani, P. K. & Movaghar, M. R. K. Enhanced intelligent approach for determination of crude oil viscosity at reservoir conditions. Scientific Reports 13, 1666 (2023).
Yousefmarzi, F., Haratian, A. & Mahdavi Kalatehno, J. Keihani kamal, M. Machine learning approaches for estimating interfacial tension between oil/gas and oil/water systems: a performance analysis. Sci. Rep. 14, 858 (2024).
Google Scholar
Hancock, J. T. & Khoshgoftaar, T. M. CatBoost for big data: an interdisciplinary review. J. Big Data. 7, 94 (2020).
Google Scholar
Kouassi, A. K. F. et al. Identification of karst cavities from 2D seismic wave impedance images based on Gradient-Boosting decision trees algorithms (GBDT): case of ordovician fracture-vuggy carbonate reservoir, Tahe oilfield, Tarim basin, China. Energies 16, 643 (2023).
Google Scholar
Gu, Y. et al. Data-driven Estimation for permeability of simplex pore-throat reservoirs via an improved light gradient boosting machine: A demonstration of sand-mud profile, Ordos basin, Northern China. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 217, 110909 (2022).
Google Scholar
Kumar, I., Tripathi, B. K. & Singh, A. Synthetic well log modeling with light gradient boosting machine for Assam-Arakan basin, India. J. Appl. Geophys. 203, 104697 (2022).
Zhang, T. et al. Interpretable machine learning model for shear wave Estimation in a carbonate reservoir using LightGBM and SHAP: a case study in the Amu Darya right bank. Front. Earth Sci. 11, 1217384 (2023).
Google Scholar
Esfandi, T., Sadeghnejad, S. & Jafari, A. Effect of reservoir heterogeneity on well placement prediction in CO2-EOR projects using machine learning surrogate models: benchmarking of boosting-based algorithms. Geoenergy Sci. Eng. 233, 212564 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zheng, H., Mahmoudzadeh, A., Amiri-Ramsheh, B. & Hemmati-Sarapardeh, A. Modeling viscosity of CO2–N2 gaseous mixtures using robust tree-based techniques: extra tree, random forest, gboost, and LightGBM. ACS Omega. 8, 13863–13875 (2023).
Google Scholar
Shen, B. et al. A novel Co2-Eor potential evaluation method based on Bo-lightgbm algorithms using hybrid feature mining. Geoenergy Sci. Eng. 222, 211427 (2023).
Google Scholar
Taylor, K. E. Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram. J. Geophys. Research: Atmos. 106, 7183–7192 (2001).
Google Scholar
Suyetin, M. The application of machine learning for predicting the methane uptake and working capacity of MOFs. Faraday Discuss. 231, 224–234 (2021).
Google Scholar
Chok, N. S. Pearson’s versus Spearman’s and Kendall’s correlation coefficients for continuous data (University of Pittsburgh, 2010).
De Winter, J. C., Gosling, S. D. & Potter, J. Comparing the pearson and spearman correlation coefficients across distributions and sample sizes: A tutorial using simulations and empirical data. Psychol. Methods. 21, 273 (2016).
Google Scholar
Hauke, J. & Kossowski, T. Comparison of values of pearson’s and spearman’s correlation coefficients on the same sets of data. Quaestiones Geographicae. 30, 87–93 (2011).
Naghizadeh, A. et al. Modeling thermal conductivity of hydrogen-based binary gaseous mixtures using generalized regression neural network. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy. 59, 242–250 (2024).
Google Scholar
Rousseeuw, P. J. & Leroy, A. M. Robust Regression and Outlier Detection (Wiley, 2005).
Goodall, C. R. 13 Computation using the QR decomposition. (1993).
Lv, Q. et al. Modeling hydrogen solubility in water: comparison of adaptive boosting support vector regression, gene expression programming, and cubic equations of state. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy. 57, 637–650 (2024).
Google Scholar
link
