Obtaining elastic properties of organic-rich shales through conventional geomechanical testing could be challenging due to availability of good quality core plugs and significant heterogeneous nature of the samples. In this regard, force spectroscopy methods, nanoindentation and atomic force microscopy (AFM) are two main powerful techniques to characterize elastic properties in nano/microscale. In this study, we investigate the applicability of these two methods on the same samples, by quantifying elastic modulus from the Bakken Shale. AFM provided us with modulus maps of higher resolution compared to the modulus maps from the nanoindentation that were created via geostatistical methods. Moreover, results from these methods were compared to demonstrate the advantages and shortcomings of each and discripancy in the outcome. To do so, multi-cluster deconvolution approach was adopted in the statistical analysis on the nanoindentation data, demonstrating 3 separate clusters and mechanical phases. AFM technique, similarly, distinguished three separate (mineral and organic) phases based on the corresponding modulus values, though with higher accuracy compared to nanoindentation and better distinction and less tolerance. It was found that nanoindentation, because it collects discrete datapoints that are farther apart from each other when thermal maturity is increased in the samples, would have difficulty to separate organic matter from intermediary phases. Overall, the range of modulus for each phase was larger in the data that was obtained by nanoindentation compared to the AFM which can be interpreted to the size of the tip and general higher resolution in the later one which is expected to probe a single particle rather than an aggregate of particles.

由于高质量岩心塞的可用性和样品的显着异质性，通过常规地质力学测试获得富含有机质页岩的弹性特性可能具有挑战性。在这方面，力谱方法、纳米压痕和原子力显微镜 (AFM) 是表征纳米/微米级弹性特性的两种主要强大技术。在本研究中，我们通过量化 Bakken 页岩的弹性模量来研究这两种方法对相同样品的适用性。与通过地质统计学方法创建的纳米压痕的模量图相比，AFM 为我们提供了更高分辨率的模量图。此外，比较了这些方法的结果，以证明每种方法的优点和缺点以及结果的差异。为此，在纳米压痕数据的统计分析中采用了多簇去卷积方法，展示了 3 个独立的簇和机械阶段。类似地，AFM 技术根据相应的模量值区分了三个独立的（矿物和有机）相，尽管与纳米压痕相比具有更高的准确度以及更好的区分和更小的容差。发现纳米压痕，因为当样品中的热成熟度增加时，它收集彼此相距更远的离散数据点，将难以将有机物质与中间相分离。全面的，