Surface‐coupled three‐dimensional geothermal model for study of permafrost geothermal regime in a building environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many Canadian northern communities the stability of building foundation systems relies on the strength of the underlying permafrost. Building deterioration owing to the loss of this strength or stability would profoundly affect the economies and well‐being of the surrounding communities. Although studies of permafrost geothermal regime in natural conditions have been conducted for a long time, studies of ground temperature and its spatial pattern and trend in a building environment are limited. The need for the study is more pressing with the projection of climate warming. Detailed information about the pattern and trend of ground temperature and active layer thickness dynamics under climate warming is essential for examination of potential permafrost degradation, as well as its impacts on buildings that are built on/in it. To quantify geothermal responses, and then permafrost degradation, to climatic change in different locations underneath a building, a surface‐coupled three‐dimensional geothermal model was developed. The model is physical process–based and couples heat and water processes at ground surface and subsurface with simulation of incoming solar radiation and precipitation distributions surrounding and underneath a building by accounting for the effect of the building's dimensions and orientation on the energy and water balance processes at the ground surface. This paper describes the theoretical basis upon which the model is built, the specific factors, and processes considered to represent the permafrost environment surrounding and below buildings, as well as the testing of the model with two different data sets and a theoretical model.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".