## 3 Results  
### Petrophysical Properties from Laboratory Measurements  
Laboratory measurements were reproduced several times for reproducibility. As the standard deviation is always lower than 2% whatever the parameter measured, the mean value has been chosen as the representative one. Results for gas porosity (\(\phi_{\mathrm{S}}\)), liquid porosity (\(\phi_{\mathrm{I}}\)), gas permeability (\(k_{g}\)), liquid permeability (\(k_{l}\)) electrical parameters such as formation factor (\(F_{lab}\)), cementation index (\(m_{lab}\)) and electrical tortuosity (\(\tau_{e}\)), and acoustical parameters such as P and S waves velocities (\(Vp\) and \(Vs\)), Bulk and Shear moduli (\(K\) and \(G\)) are summarized in Table 1. To facilitate the explanations and interpretations of the results, only one porosity type will be kept. As expected, gas porosity and permeability are always slightly higher than liquid measurements. Porosity measured by triple weighing \(\phi_{l}\) has been chosen because samples are more often saturated during measurements and both results are similar. For permeability, Klinkenberg effect is responsible for the  
Figure 2: 2D slices obtained from 3D XRMT images. Blue color represents the matrix phase, red the macro-phase and orange the micro-phase. differences between the two measurements ([PERSON] et al., 2018), and gas permeability \(k_{g}\) will be used as a reference here. Table 1 shows that the three rock types present significant differences. Differences in porosity and structural properties (\(F_{lab}\), \(m_{lab}\)) can be easily observed in Figure 3. Samples are displayed depending on their porosity and formation factor, with indications about cementation index. Generally, low porosity induces high formation factor. Normandie presents the highest porosity and lowest formation factor, Euville the opposite and Lexos is in between. They are all situated between the \(m=2\) and \(m=3\) lines, corresponding to carbonate rocks ([PERSON] et al., 2018; [PERSON] et al., 2018). With the lowest tortuosity, Normandie presents the best connectivity due to high permeability and low tortuosity, while Euville has the highest tortuosity and Lexos is again comprised in between. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Samples** & \(\phi_{g}\) **(\%)** & \(\phi_{t}\) **(\%)** & \(k_{g}\) **(mD)** & \(k_{l}\  
Concerning mechanical properties (\(Vp\) and \(Vs\)) displayed in Table 1, the lowest velocities correspond to the highest porosities, which is consistent with the literature [46]. Normandie has therefore the lowest \(Vp\). However, Lexos presents higher \(Vp\) than Euville for lower porosities. This is due to dolomite rocks characteristics [46]. Also, high \(Vp\) are more likely to occur in samples with a high proportion of matrix, and therefore a high cohesiveness. A low proportion of micropores, characterized by a diameter smaller than 10 \(\upmu\)m [5], usually induces a high proportion of matrix [7]. Therefore, \(Vp\) should be higher in samples with low proportion of micropores. Figure 4 displays the pores sizes distribution of the three rock types, and then the micropores proportion. Normandie presents an unimodal distribution of pore sizes with most of pore diameters smaller than 3.5 \(\upmu\)m, averaging 61% \(\pm\) 8% of the total pores size. Its proportion of micropores is comprised between 62% and 80%. Lexos also has an unimodal distribution with a majority of pores size between 3.2 and 11.5 \(\upmu\)m (38% \(\pm\) 8%). Between 57% and 78% of pores are given to be micropores. As for it, Euville presents a bimodal distribution with pore diameters either larger than 31 \(\upmu\)m (33% \(\pm\) 6%) or either smaller than 1.1 \(\upmu\)m (38% \(\pm\) 11%). Proportion of micropores ranges from 47% to 63%. Euville is the rock type with the lowest proportion of micropores. Although samples in each rock type have similar properties, some groups emerge from data. Indeed, Figure 3 display four groups inside Normandie samples, two for Euville and two others for Lexos.