MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1922029902 · doi:10.1111/gwat.12271

Joint Estimation of Hydraulic and Poroelastic Parameters from a Pumping Test

2014· article· en· W1922029902 on OpenAlexafffund
Steven J. Berg, Walter A. Illman, Chin Man Mok

Bibliographic record

VenueGround Water · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEnvironmental Security Technology Certification Program
KeywordsPoromechanicsJoint (building)Test (biology)GeologyGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringPorosityPorous mediumPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coupling of hydraulic and poroelastic processes is critical in predicting processes involving the deformation of the geologic medium in response to fluid extraction or injection. Numerical models that consider the coupling of hydraulic and poroelastic processes require the knowledge of relevant parameters for both aquifer and aquitard units. In this study, we jointly estimated hydraulic and poroelastic parameters from pumping test data exhibiting "reverse water level fluctuations," known as the Noordbergum effect, in aquitards adjacent to a pumped aquifer. The joint estimation was performed by coupling BIOT2, a finite element, two-dimensional, axisymmetric, groundwater model that considers poroelastic effects with the parameter estimation code PEST. We first tested our approach using a synthetic data set with known parameters. Results of the synthetic case showed that for a simple layered system, it was possible to reproduce accurately both the hydraulic and poroelastic properties for each layer. We next applied the approach to pumping test data collected at the North Campus Research Site (NCRS) on the University of Waterloo (UW) campus. Based on the detailed knowledge of stratigraphy, a five-layer system was modeled. Parameter estimation was performed by: (1) matching drawdown data individually from each observation port and (2) matching drawdown data from all ports at a single well simultaneously. The estimated hydraulic parameters were compared to those obtained by other means at the site yielding good agreement. However, the estimated shear modulus was higher than the static shear modulus, but was within the range of dynamic shear modulus reported in the literature, potentially suggesting a loading rate effect.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGround WaterSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207