Resolution analysis of tomographic slug test head data: Two‐dimensional radial case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hydraulic tomography inverse problems, which are solved to estimate aquifer hydraulic properties between wells, are known to be ill‐conditioned and a priori information is often added to regularize numerical inversion of head data. Because both head data and a priori information have effects on the inversed solution, assessing the meaningful information contained in head data alone is required to ensure comprehensive interpretation of inverse solutions, whether they are regularized or not. This study thus aims to assess the amount of information contained in tomographic slug tests head data to resolve heterogeneity in Kh, Kv/Kh, and Ss. Therefore, a resolution analysis based on truncated singular value decomposition of the sensitivity matrix with a noise level representative of field measurements is applied using synthetic data reflecting a known littoral aquifer. As an approximation of the hydraulic behavior of a real aquifer system, synthetic tomographic experiments and associated sensitivity matrices are generated using a radial flow model accounting for wellbore storage to simulate slug tests in a plane encompassing a stressed well and an observation well. Although fine‐scale resolution of heterogeneities is limited by the diffusive nature of the groundwater flow equations, inversion of tomographic slug tests head data holds the potential to uniquely resolve coarse‐scale heterogeneity in Kh, Kv/Kh, and Ss, as inscribed in the resolution matrix. This implies that tomographic head data can provide key information on aquifer heterogeneity and anisotropy, but that fine‐scale information must be supplied by a priori information to obtain finer details.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".