MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1532893001 · doi:10.1029/gm047p0007

A Solution to the Inverse Problem of Coupled Hydrological and Thermal Regimes

2011· book-chapter· en· W1532893001 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical monograph · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretizationParameterized complexityA priori and a posterioriInverse problemApplied mathematicsFinite element methodMathematical optimizationThermalInverseMathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematical analysisGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In typical geological settings, the subsurface hydrological and thermal regimes are often closely coupled. A realistic analysis of the coupled systems requires that the two regimes be considered simultaneously. To make optimal use of the often noisy hydrological and thermal data, it is necessary to adopt an inverse formulation. In this paper, we report some results of our Erst stage investigation, using a steady state, 2—D (cross—section) model. A 2—D isoparametric finite element model is used to discretize the problem, and the nodal values of temperature and hydraulic head, as well as the elemental medium thermal conductivities and permeabilities, are treated as parameters. A generalized non—linear stochastic inverse method of Bayesian type is used for parameter estimation, with the a priori information on the parameters described in terms of the first two moments of the appropiate probability distributions. For computational efficiency, a gradient method is used in the parameter estimation procedure, and the gradient matrix (derivatives of the parameterized system with respect to the parameters), needed in the iteration scheme, is formulated analytically at the elemental level. Numerical results show that the non-linearity of the problem, which is effectively determined by the quality of the a priori information, plays an important role in the performance of the method. With a sufficient number of reasonably well distributed data, the parameters can be well resolved.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.175 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it