A method to assess risk reduction when utilizing geosynthetic clay liners (GCLs) with compacted soil liners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an analytical solution developed to estimate probabilities of “failure” or advective flux “exceedance” for the case of a spatially variable geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) situated over a spatially variable compacted soil liner (CSL). The risk of utilizing such a liner system is assessed relative to a regulatory compacted clay-based soil liner. The analytical solution developed is validated over a range of parameters against random field simulation using the Local Average Subdivision method, and the analytical solution is shown to be in good agreement with simulation. The analytical solution is then used to examine the “probability of exceedance” for a spatially variable GCL and CSL combined liner system. It is shown that the use of a GCL can potentially result in a low probability of exceedance when used with a spatially varying, high hydraulic conductivity CSL. The risk of exceedance generally decreases as the hydraulic conductivity of the CSL decreases. An example problem is presented to demonstrate the capabilities of the analytical solution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".